I am reminded of the liberals on talk shows whose major arguments are strident voices, overrunning other speakers, namecalling and ranting cants of old sophistries long discredited. True civil discourse was never their long suit but when you have no other argument, you use what you have to hand.

civility is a variable in the persuasion equation

I'm not overwhelmingly sure any politician or government employee is a real "member" of any party anymore. It seems that comparing AR's portrayal of the politicians and their associates in AS, she had their number pretty well sown up. I see politicians (of all flavors) as manipulative users who just do whatever is necessary to maintain their power. I have a particular case where my neighbor has 250 alpacas on 2.5 acres, has never picked up one dod doo, and the state has sent them 3 letters over 3 years saying "You are in violation of state and federal law" and that was it. I have been forced to go to court to try to remove the mess. Why am I the enforcer for the state? Because the state and the politicians see no gain, no money, or no benefit to themselves in doing their job. It seems the 2 camps of screamers and demeaners consist of ideological rally points, not political party.

Just from my meager knowledge from AS, I would agree with this. I got from the story her focus was mainly on the differences between those who use their minds, to create and apply knowledge, and those that ride on the coattails of them. She seemed to champion with John Gault a person who is independent, intelligent, thoughtful, philosophical and who did not ask or desire for a government to direct him. My experience is that government loves to make rules, then uses them as tools for their own ends. Justice, as such, is never the result of those rules. This forum seems to invite the use of the mind, but there is also a lot of emotional content as well.

Good question. I speculate that she would approve of it. If there were only a way to expand it from an online forum for discussion of ideas and politics to an actual free-market off-line society with laissez faire capitalism (government's only role being to protect us), she would really, really, love it!

John has a point kh. Besides, my mom says you'll go blind if you castigate.Point for all the big words.

k, please remember this is a discussion forum. I very seldom agree with Mike, and some of his cant and vituperation disgust me, but I recognize his right to do it. Personal attacks notwithstanding, Mike is a reasoned debater, buttressing his points with facts, as we all try to do. Simply because he has a point of view which strikes the greater part of as inane is no reason to castigate him. Simply treat him as an obstreperous little brother still wiping his nose on his sleeve.

In my short time here, I've come to view the forum as one of the very few places where I can observe and/or engage in applied Objectivism. I think Ayn Rand would have approved, but I can't say that I think she would have been proud.

You did see the picture of BO with his foot on the Resolute Desk" didn't you? If he disgraces the office he holds, no matter what the office is, he's still a disgrace.

I would have saluted BO when I was on active duty, but there are salutes and there are salutes.

BTW, you salute the rank, not the uniform. In BO's case, rank may have other meanings.

As for dropping the H from BHO, I seen to recall that there was a big deal made of it's use in 08 election. I'm just trying to "respect" his wishes.

I would like to point out the fact that conservative and liberal points of view have migrated in major ways since the days of JFK. Many of his views would be very "at home" in the "tea party". Also the Country Club republicans which made up the majority of the party in AR's day are now few indeed. And I think she would have seen familiar traces of her distant past in today's government unions and their self feeding dollar troughs.

Today's republican party with it's tea party subset has much more in common with the regular guy on the street than the elitist left does. If JFK was around today, saying what he did back when AR was a fan, he'd be a Republican.

This last week, he would answer to Obomber....

LOL I'm voting for the last one.

I call him Barry O. ...
or Dear Leader ...
or the Soros Sockpuppet ...
but mostly I call him Marxist Ass-hat.

Your behavior is outrageous

I disagree that Nixon disgraced the office. By todays standards what Nixon did was wrong but somewhat tame. When he was caught he stood up like a man and refused to put the country thru a constitutional crisis-he resigned. President Obama is fully aware that no one would have the stomach for trying to remove the first black President. He has been a far worse and more disgraceful President than Nixon.

Every society, every culture has rules. Most are not written down. William Graham Sumner called them "folkways." You can be a punk if you want. That, too, is allowed in most cultures.

If I would've said Rand you'd have thought I meant that conservative Paul.
By the way. Don't private message me again! Or I'll sick my "cheer leaders" on you. You're a piece!

"And you can call Ayn Rand "Ayn" just as you could call Bertrand Russell or Stephen Hawking by their given names, if you were on good terms with them. Within Objectivist circles, unless you actually knew her in New York, it is like putting your feet on the ."
is the sort of elitism that turns people off. You can set out your own rules, but do not be surprised when people refuse to follow them

You must be aware of the fact that we have many posters and visitors here who self-identify as "conservatives."

Of all the Presidents, only two have disgraced the office, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. They are still Pres. Nixon and Pres. Clinton, not Tricky Dick and Slick Willie. I am not an army guy, but I understand the concept: you salute the uniform, not the man. To my understanding, if you denigrate, the man, then you demean the office and the process by which he was granted the trust.

I voted for Barack Obama in 2008 (though not in 2012) in the hope of everything that this country stands for. Like President Nixon, his flaws are easy to see in retrospect. In 2008, he was a bright young politician out of nowhere who would complete the work of Brown v. Board and lay to rest the separations that left the nation unequally divided. I did not expect him to actually do anything. The President is just a figurehead. But I voted for the image. But I got George W. Bush. Again. Darn.

Ayn Rand explained the familiarity we take with our leaders - FDR, JFK - as an example of benevolence, the essential equality of our democracy, versus the formality of Europe where the wife of a medical doctor with a Ph.D. who teaches at university would be called "Frau Doktor Doktor Professor." But that is not the same thing as Tricky Dick, Slick Willy, and B.O.

And you can call Ayn Rand "Ayn" just as you could call Bertrand Russell or Stephen Hawking by their given names, if you were on good terms with them. Within Objectivist circles, unless you actually knew her in New York, it is like putting your feet on the furniture.

Maybe I call him bo as in bo bo the clown, or for his initials, or his dog's name.... Is it meant as in insult because he is an insult to the office he holds. The people who voted for him have insulted, and undermined everything good about this country. If that's anti intellectual, calling something what it is, then so be it. I'm for honesty. Stop calling us conservatives, stop acting as if you're dealing with conservatives in here... Ayn had to explain the use of initials instead of saying a long name? I know how she felt about conservatives. What IS your hang up?

You call The President "bo" an old term for "body odor" which I have seen from conservatives who refuse to honor the Office as distinct from the man. Pres. Kennedy was "JFK" as Pres. Roosevelt was "FDR." Ayn Rand explained why. That is different from your anti-intellectual insult to the President.

In point of fact, Ayn Rand had as many harsh words for (modern) conservatives as for (modern) liberals. If you wish to assert that Sen. Randal Paul is not a conservative then show his lack of religion and his denigration of tradition. See my post here under Culture on "Ayn Rand versus Conservatives."

Has Paul ever referred to himself as a conservative? That was someone elses quote. You seem to like to bundle anyone who opposed bo as conservative, and you use it derogatorally.

“Senator Paul, a conservative leader and strong voice for the Tea Party movement, will be offering our perspective on the state of the union.”
http://www.humanevents.com/2013/02/12/pa...

"My belief is that she would be proud of what we are doing here."

This is an excellent illustration of the fact that a belief in something doesn't make it true and the fact that words have meaning. Ayn Rand admired the ideas and achievements of other (but not many) individuals, but she did not take pride in the achievements of others.

She was clearly proud of her writing. She was also proud to be an American citizen. Even that was something she achieved as an individual.

Any one who reads Anthem will be able to see what she thought of the word "we" compared to the word "I."

I have no doubt that she would not admire some of those who "share their ideas" here, especially the mystic who created God in John Galt's image.

(The "Galt Like God" can be found in a search of the topics.)

I agree with you Rich. The Gulch is a solid platform for the exchange of ideas that AR was involved with; individualism v collectivism, the primacy of reason vis-à-vis emotionalism. While it impossible to know what AR would have thought, I think she would have been proud to see her ideas being debated.