Devil's Advocate

Given the Former President used his political authority to promote insurrection, given congressional leaders used their political authority to promote sedition, and given the current President is using his political authority to proclaim a right to healthcare, the Judiciary in its existing role as the final arbiter of constitutional law, is better suited to command (by court order) the appropriate use of government's monopoly on force. It would essentially be a check on the capricious nature of a political call to arms.

It's all about the headlines that generate the ratings, that create and sustain a following that wins elections. The Republican Purge is real, and the midterms will determine its success as political strategy in American politics. An extended family member of mine recently noted, "Impeachment is just street cred for him," and that pretty much sums up my opinion of The Donald and his Dark Wing. The Donald's 1st term election was unimaginable, until it happened. Former republican opposition candidates undermining the election in Congress on his behalf was unimaginable, until it

Agreed, and there is no benevolent form of a military dictatorship. However, a charismatic general with popular support might act well as a caretaker monopoly on the government's use of force until a voluntary force of Peacekeepers (military, police, 1st responders) could be formed, effectively becoming an un-elected or appointed 4th branch of government in charge of securing America's "blessings of liberty". The actual "blessings" would be narrowly defined and limited to an individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness within the social context of America. Th

Yep, for me it's more of a slide show... Anyhoo, perhaps I'll reinstate myself as, "Abby Normal" someday.

Eiuol, I honestly don't know how to clarify my initial response to you, "I believe that January 6th was an insurrection promoted by republican party seditionists, to state it bluntly. You may judge me by that." Are you trying to get me to confess that I'm actually a republican party seditionist testing the waters here? You and I have quibbled over definitions before, but this is a bit much for either of us. I intentionally use the word 'restore' to indicate moving forward as opposed to returning to a prior state. My use of, "to be restored", is the factual expression of an agenda (not

Some time ago, in another Objectivist Forum, a poster noted that I appeared to assemble information in the form of images as, I guess a kind of transformation of written content. I do tend to think in terms of images, but as that is natural and unremarkable to me, I haven't any idea how different this may be generally. On reflection, my hope is that it is unique. I'd like to be really good at something no one else does!

You guys haven't created a secret handshake in my absence, have you? Know what I mean?? Nudge-nudge, say no more!

Echos of Monty Python in this lonely chamber... Guest: "I came here for an argument." Moderator: "No, you didn't." Guest: "Yes, I did!" To the issue of my credibility, I invite anyone to review my previous posts and topics. They will reveal that I am at worst, a pain in the ass. To the issue of the withholding my legal name, I respectfully remind you that the identity of the messenger does not validate the message in itself and that there are many reasons to avoid volunteering your legal name, age, gender, etc., on the internet, not the least of which is identity theft. Th

Wow... just wow.

Et tu, Brute? "For better or worse, the Former (to be RESTORED) President is arguably the most influential political figure of the 21st Century, perhaps best evident in his catch phrases as adopted by current world leaders to maintain influence over their electorates. However, I'm not returning from hiatus to argue similarities between The Donald and John Galt." MEANING: Whether or not you like the former president or his policy, he remains in control of the republican leadership which makes him the default candidate in 2024, and which if elected would RESTORE him to the presi

Not-Neil responding: I believe Americans have too much (or misunderstand inherent rights) when they demand a right to freedom from want.

Respectfully, no.

I had no idea because I wasn't interested in the author, I was interested in statements made by Barbara Branden relating what Ayn Rand had said about becoming an atheist. I was familiar with these statements from other sources so I linked to the article I was referencing in a post 9 years ago. And now, following the link to its source, there is Neil Parille. So you got me, I linked to an article 9 years ago written by an author I'm not interested in to cite material about an author I am interested in. How does that make me Neil?

I have no idea who Neil Parille is, or why you are linking him to my posts. I imagine you can reach out to Eiuol or any of the other moderators to verify my credentials, if that's necessary. I'm disappointed at the effort being wasted to create a straw version of what I posted, so I'll attempt to clarify as we move forward. Again, "restored" was the original word I used, and I clarified that when I saw it had been substituted for the word "reinstated" as part of an argument to cast doubt on my sincerity. Fair enough, I'll respond to legitimate questions (even repetitive ones) to clarif

The idea of Liberty Shrugging came to me after hearing the French Embassy announcement, "a bronze cast of the original model used to create the Statue of Liberty will be coming to Washington, D.C." ~ https://wjla.com/news/local/the-original-statue-of-liberty-coming-to-dc I recalled (but cannot cite) an earlier observation about the irony of the gift of liberty by the French, who have too little, to the Americans, who have too much, which led me to creating this topic for discussion.