bobsponge

Yes, but when you take rational examination of static things like visual art, in order to disqualify one type and qualify another, you have to add metaphysical/mystical attribute to one and not the other, which in essence would be irrational, and then thereby making her definitions self-contradictory? It seems like if one follows Ayn's rules on what constitutes art, one must abandon much of the foundation which she laid down beneath said art theories. I agree with a lot of O'ist stuff, but not all, and one thing makes me wonder-- if it is such a perfect closed system, why is it such a debated philosophy?

There's no other way to fight taxes than to not pay them. Unless you have logical alternatives, in which case I am all ears.

What are you insinuating? How many great numbers are insulted? Let's have a census of insulted people, please.

I think Ayn had a special bitter place in her heart for modern artists. I don't blame her. However-- how is it rational to officially exclude one form of visual input while including another? Wouldn't that be irrational? Is this another case of people following blindly word-for-word saying that 'because Ayn said so, them's the rules'?

Just got Sid Meier's Railroads. Much fun. For those of you who dream of dabbling in Taggart Transcontinental's sandbox. Kiss a few good solid evenings goodbye when you first get it Just getting the hang of it now, plan to test out the online multiplayer tonight. If anyone else has this game, maybe we can run an O'ist competition.

Being an artist, and having sold 7 years of my soul to the video games industry in the past, I think I'm fairly well qualified to post this: Art's purpose, at least to me, seems to be to (1) to put the artist's emotional or physical expression into a medium in which he can share that sensation, and (2) to accomplish, as best he can, pushing that sensation into the viewer/listener/reader etc. Some would argue that my smutty pinups are not art, however they incite lust in their viewers, which pretty much directly proves point 1 and 2. If you reject the adult material on 'societal value' premises, then you're clearly failing your Objectivist principles. When you look at a painting, you feel something. Most of the time (I do think that Campbells Soup paintings are a joke, but some folks live them). When you read a book, you feel something. When you listen to music, you feel something. When you see a show, or a movie... on and on. Video games are simply another medium in which artists, storytellers, and musicians can immerse their audience in something in order to share an experience. Just because it is a large collaborative effort, nor a commercial effort, does not disqualify it as an artistic medium. I make my art for money too-- it is what brings home the bacon. Because one profits from art does not disqualify ones effectiveness. To apply a double standard for labor vs art is to, once again, forget your Objectivist principles. Labor is labor, be it forging steel or painting a canvas. Steel workers are in the business of making raw material for modern culture and their technique could be likened to an art; artists are in the business of making things visually interesting; video game producers are in the business of making entertaining experiences. What we do is what we do-- specialization in any industry can be called 'the art of...' I detest the double-standard that art is some voodoo metaphysical holier-than-thou 'lucky' endowment we somehow absorb. It is not. Artistic talent is something that one works hard for their entire life, always improving but rarely perfecting, at least in their own eyes. Same goes for any other field.

Shazam! Right from the random quote on the front page: The citizen who thinks he sees that the commonwealth's political clothes are worn out, and yet holds his peace and does not agitate for a new suit, is disloyal; he is a traitor.--Mark Twain

Let's examine something... What if, suppose, there came about a federal law which made it illegal to love your children?

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt." ~Ayn Rand

One scary thing, though, is that he cried out for the US to 'lead the fight against global warming' makes me gag. doh, I now see thats already been covered.

Prove that one, please. That's got to be one of the funniest things I have ever heard.

Gruss Gott! What a can of worms this has become. Let me clarify some things. I do not oppose fair taxation. I oppose income taxation, its roots, and its current use. The US government needs to learn that it should not (A) shoot itself in the foot by taking an interest loan out for its own bloody currency, and ( should not bite the hand that feeds it. Income taxation is immoral on all counts, no matter how you chop it up or break it down, and none of you can argue against that fact. Turning-in of such a protestor would be immoral as well-- you'd be aiding in the removal of the rights of someone else by proxy-- someone who is protesting the immoral suppression of his rights in the first place. Support of income taxation is also immoral for the same reasons. Opposition or protesting of an immoral law by noncompliance is not immoral. It's called civil disobedience, and it happens all the time. It's how Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus, and how the patriots dumped tea into Boston Harbor. It's how Ghandi sat down in nonviolent protest. Just because a law is on paper does not make it right. The acts of the Nazis were legal in Germany, yet they denied people their basic human rights. Did that make it ok? In closing, I'd like to add something, oddly enough from Malcolm X: "You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it."

I know they'll figure it out eventually-- their computers will probably start squawking sometime soon. I don't really care, though. There's really nothing they'll be able to do to me unless they go and violate all sorts of international laws (wouldn't be a first! ) It has to be worth their time to follow up on the myriad crap they would have to follow up on, and in the end they'll be running into a long list of dead ends.

Through all the massacre details, I kept thinking "man, if just one of those students or faculty had a gun for their own protection, they could have probably taken the madman down." It is also worth mentioning that the campus had specifically banned weapon-carrying. Perfect grounds for rapists, muggers, and other assaults.

Have you read any of Thoreau's treatise on civil disobedience? It's a good read.

The "Good Germans" also thought that way, and look what happened.

Facts: 1. The money collected through income tax is used to pay off the interest on the US national debt. 2. Said interest is completely unnecessary, as it is mandated through the Federal Reserve Act, which states that the USA *must* borrow its money at interest from the Federal Reserve Bank, which is a private company. 3. The USA could, has the right to do so, and should (reference the Lincoln Greenback and Colonial Scrip), make its own money sans Fed, without generating an interest debt. Debt-free currency! And it would remove a layer from the M3 reporting and liability regarding how much money is in circulation and who is truly liable for destroying our individual savings. 4. Our congress, who has the ability to control the inflation of our currency, chooses not to, even though it is directly against the interest of the American people. 5. Our congress continues to screw social security, which then moves them to consider mandating pensions and other hefty retirement benefits, all to patch a problem that could be alleviated by making our savings accounts *not* worthless by the time we are ready to retire. 6. Our congressional infighting and growing welfare statism are bringing about an alltime record amount of nanny-state money-burning which comes from said national debt-loans, and the taxpayers are then forced to pay for the damage. 7. Our constitutional rights are then continually trod upon by things such as the Patriot Act, the Banking Secrecy act, the Know-your-customer act, the Real ID act, etc. These acts do not apply to non-citizens, so who is the real enemy here? This, my friends, is the cream of why I have major issues with paying income tax. I am happy to pay highway tax, fuel tax, sales tax, etc. for what I use because those make sense-- but forcing a man to pay a portion of his sweat and blood so that others may flush his rights away and kick him when he's down-- that is immoral and I cannot support its perpetuation any longer. We're paying our elected officials to crap on us.

I used to do the minimal-red-flag tactic but at this point I just can't bring myself to send any more money to them.

Not unless you can find my social security number.

I prefer the Glock 30. Smaller profile, bigger holes

Yup. We have no right not to be offended, but we do have the right to express ourselves freely (ie, advertise). Yet this will most likely end up with ones rights infringed, and ones nonrights enforced. Why is it that when a butt shows up somewhere, nobody minds, but if big breasts show up somewhere, everyone gets their panties in a bunch? My opinion is that it's undiluted jealousy.

I keep a low profile and take my chances. I'm not accepting any government handouts, and I cannot live morally by subsidizing the theft and unconstitutionality of our current regime. What else am I supposed to do, but shrug off the looters who would steal the fruits of my hard-earned labor when they deserve none?

And folks wonder why I don't pay my taxes anymore.

That's because it is good news and there is no way so far that it can be used to kill our babies!

Giggity goo! I like.