Mammon

There is too much pressure to look good instead of actually being good. It's bizarre that someone who produces values and actually is qualified can be dismissed so easily for lying and yet elsewhere someone who is under qualified can go over the Gatekeeper's head because they know someone. It's an odd world.

You should be careful about making such huge accusations and generalizations. A lot of people on the "the left" in America are actually Jewish.

It's not a matter of getting wrong, it's a matter of what you get it wrong on. In Paul's case he drops the ball on some very vitol issues. So much so that it contradicts his positives. He's a good congressman, but wouldn't be a good president.

There was a thread awhile back about Apple getting sued by someone for anti-trust and I said it was difficult to feel sympathy for them because I didn't respect the way the market their products (namely the Mac vs PC commercials). Someone suggested I should leave the forum because of it. Maybe you should leave the forum Kendall. DON'T. MESS. WITH. MACS. MAN. Also, Tenure, your Mac wont start up because you bought a Mac.

So many pet peeves in such a little time. I don't understand the "OMG BOOKS R 2 LONG WTF?!" mind set. Like, do people just not read? You probably read a good 1,000 pages of material a month if your at all aware of the world you live in. Plus, it doesn't take long compared to the rest of your life. Get some reading skills people! Also, the "EXTREMES ARE BAD!" rhetoric and that one poster (Thunderdog?) who pretended to be so smart saying it. I've finally found the perfect comeback for that. I'm going to be a "non-extreme practicing" doctor. Imagine that. "Good morning Steve, good news... we cured half of your cancer! But we are going to leave the other half in the body because we don't believe we should go to extremes here."

It's nice?! It's friggin terrible. One step forward; two steps back, man.

Wow, I called the entire rest of the thread here. *pats self on back* A centrist with some left leanings. More likely to compromise and listen then stubbornly and blindly go into something. Trusts people way too much. You know, that's exactly what all the leftists, 9/11 Truthers and Islamists said about Bush. And if I'm not mistaken he just gave a farewell speech and will be out of Office after this weekend. Why is Obama different? Plus parts of the scenario you described would be highly ideal actually. Ha! I knew about this for weeks, I though it was common knowledge around here. You guys need to do your homework!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLlOxxfWXxw I think this video conveys a great sense of life. I just love it. Haven't found too many other people who do though.

It's really easy for someone online to tell you to leave everything you love. Don't we all wish we had that amount of willpower and conviction? Let's be real. Just don't go to church with them. When they ask why just say "I don't want to" and leave it at that. Let them go, and in the meantime cook them a nice brunch so when they get back they know you aren't mad and you still love them.

I went back in checked some of the stuff and saw I had things a bit confused. India has the 2nd largest Muslim population, Indonesia is the first. Semantics played a role there. However, the thing I was getting at, which led to my comment, was that India has more Muslims then Pakistan, there are no Indian terrorists fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan, no hijackers, and no Indian Muslims in Guantanamo Bay. So, the point still stands. Indian Muslims don't blame the West for all their problems and are in fact, extremely open to Western ideals compared to the rest of the Muslim world.

I automatically assume it wont be. .... Aaaand this part of the reason why.

Yeah, this thread help the problem. Took note of the Options tab up there now too.

I agree. I don't participate in Dark Marketing.

*** Mod's note: Merged with an earlier topic. -sN *** http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=44326494073&ref=nf I clicked the link to the forum Mimpy provided in this thread and now I view the threads differently. Instead of just having all the posts in order there is a list/outline "posts in this thread" thing at the bottom. It's bugging the crap out of me. It's their a way to change it back?

Yeah, seriously, they wouldn't let the Mexican government touch them. I could see them becoming a new Confederacy of some type though. It's a huge stretch but I always imagined it would be easy for Texas to break away from the Union and make itself untouchable. All it would have to do is drive troops across the border to Louisiana and take over Barksdale Airforce Base. They'd get all the nukes located there and the B-52s needed to drop them anywhere they want. Then it would become M.A.D. for America. Also, Thomas Sowell made a similar prediction in that he said the polarization of issues in this country would lead to a bloody civil war eventually.

Your not taking over Google the company. He means, taking over the results of their searches. There are ways to make it where you are on the front page of a Google search, which in turn guarantees lots of traffic.

I'm yet to meet another Objectivist who can accurately explain how the Federal Reserve in America contributes to inflation, and causes the boom and bust cycles. Or who can explain how America prints out money to pay off it's debt. Or who understands that deflation is worse then inflation. Or that credit is used in all your transactions regardless of if you yourself actually use credit cards. Or that banks create money on their own.... There are numerous issues where Objectivists I've communicated with showed not only a lack of understand of key economic issues, but a total backwards application of principles. So, even glimpsing a more rational outlook on things still doesn't do much without specific study. Granted I haven't talk to all of them out there. But I believe in the Law of Large Numbers because that at least hasn't let me down yet. I've also meet people who read Atlas Shrugged and were still worthless human beings afterwards. I think subscribing reading the book in order to understand the world in an instant isn't a good thing to do unless we are talking about an already intelligent person who would get it. As Rand herself observed, their aren't too many of those around. The original posting was intended to be more jovial or whatever. But, I see this assumption being asserted so seriously sometimes. I want to address it.

Look at America.

It might just depend on who you talk to. Some seem to hold the believe that if a person is in any way affiliated with the Democratic Party in America, then they are automatically a socialist. Socialism is about having the means of production forcibly controlled by one exclusive group of people. So it comes it all shapes and sizes. Obama hasn't made any plans to outright take over the means of production and exclude anyone from competing without his or his administration or groups permission. So, no, he's not a socialist. He also hasn't concertized his positions very well. And a lot of things he says seem to be conveniently ignored by whoever is doing the commenting about what he said. Most of the discussion on his views involved taking a sound bit and interpreting it to mean whatever you feel it should mean. For instance, here is an excerpt from a CNBC interview during the elections. So, what do you want this to mean? That Obama is definitely out to get the free-market because he knows about it's strength and his maniacal drive to power urges him to control this wonderful allocator of resources? That he is only saying it to get votes? That he just doesn't know what to say? Take your pick. When you begin throwing labels around easily they begin loose their meaning. Like the old story about the boy who cried wolf. Don't speak without certainty if you can. Certainty precludes Hugo Chavez is a socialist; Barack Obama is not, or at least not Hugo Chavez.

You beat me to the punch again khaight!

Why is there this assumption that reading Atlas Shrugged will give someone the most understanding of economic principles and problems? Reading Atlas Shrugged doesn't make you an expert on anything.

We are still behind The Twilight Series, Ann Coulter, and Diet books! We've got a long way to go. Rand should of wrote about sexy vampires and flat stomachs too, America would demand it then. I guess it's a good thing that it's selling though, amongst the people who read the WSJ. But, like I was trying to say above, I'm worried that the author of that article will give people a false impression coming into reading the book.

You hit it out of the park, khaight. I had the same thought when reading this. Especially since the language came off as strictly anti-Democrat more then pro-anything good. You said it already and I think this provides a little bit of a revelation as to why we are having such trouble getting the point across to the rest of the world. There is mind-set that Rand and Objectivism are strictly right-wing, Republican support materials and articles like this, though good for media exposure, really just spur the confusion. The broader moral points are totally missed. Even some of the economic points are missed. Somehow people read it and walk away with only "anti-big-government!" in their minds. The only way we can our ideas ingrained is if people walk away with broader ideas like "Christianity is wrong" "Maybe I should pay more attention to intellectual ideas, and take them seriously" "Maybe I should be a more creative, productive and honest person instead of a mooch and slacker"... Also, I think blaming the businessman in the current crisis is idiotic. Some guys messed up, specifically the automakers, but the vast majority of people are victims of a deadly cocktail of expansionist monetary policy, taxation, unfair accounting regulations, a stifled education system and increasing hostile population. Not just here, but abroad as well. We can throw Atlas Shrugged around forever, but it's useless unless if falls in the hands of the right people. And I fear some of those people are becoming apathetic before they give it a chance because they are associating it with as khaight said... something shallow.

Well played sir! Well played. Hey, if she can use Microsoft Office, answer phones, and listen to complicated orders and execute them timely then any pornstar check can work as a secretary or receptionist. I'd hire a ex-porn star. Everyone in town would want to come to my office for... business meetings!

Going off the above debate about Greenspan (Green Spawn if you talking to Gordan Liddy) there may not be contradictions but their is confusion and their is human error. A lack of morality on some level could be the culprit here. But I wonder what type of weight was on Greenspans shoulders the entire time? Maybe he just took the easy way out and sold out? Maybe he was trying to accomplish something greater and was clothes-lined by the powers that be? I don't know a lot about Greenspan. Not as much as I do about the gold standard, monetary policy, banking and the Fed. I haven't read the man's biography yet. The above sentences are about as much speculation as I can get out of myself, without venturing into the realm of making stuff up.