CapitalistSwine

I was unaware of that. That said I still get a good deal of useful information from CATO and I have friends that work for them in DC and in other locations.

You have to understand however, that to them before this was done it was market forces that were charging them $150,000 medical bills for an emergency or otherwise necessary surgery when they have a $30,000 income. They don't care nor understand. They will take the lower quality if it means not losing their livelihood because of an unfortunate accident due to our horribly messed up medical sector.

Soo...is this what you wanted to share, or the singing thing or? Also, they recently moved him out of his isolation cell: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13235977 Not that it makes Obama's complete and utter silence on this issue ok.

If you look at commentary they pretty much view it as free. They are more than willing to suffer higher premiums for the rest.

You might as well vote for Obama then. (Referring to mentioning Trump). Check the Trump thread, I posted a bunch of info in there. He is the least Republican of them all.

Good luck ever getting rid of ObamaCare. These people will die before they give this free candy up: From: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/gznyk/what_obama_care_has_done_for_me/

If my goal was to sit on my ass all day and complain about the state of the world then perhaps.

You can't open a .pdf in Photoshop that already contains layers. Either it's what Brian said or they saved the image to their computer and then manipulated it themselves. A .pdf would open as the image and maybe a transparent background layer. Time to find another frivolous topic to focus on to distract America from real issues.<-this is a mirror of a comment on the youtube video posted, but I agree with it wholeheartedly. Now, I may be wrong about this, but this is what makes sense to me based on my several college classes I've taken in Photoshop and Illustrator, the experiences gained from those classes, and this was how things worked last time I looked. At any rate, I agree the last thing we need is for the debate to focus on his birth. That would be Obama's wet dream.

When the main indie films competing against it have regular tv commercial advertisements for their movie (The Conspirator, et al) that is most certainly not a good sign. While I am not well aware of the costs associated, I am obliged to feel that if they had put in the expense to do that the potential increase in the number of those seeing the movie may have made up for that marketing investment.

I certainly do feel that Ron Paul has a notably better chance if both of them are on their own and not running together. As you said, he has a large grassroots backing from the last election and it's follow-up that are ready to go full throttle this time around. Secondly, Gary Johnson is pro-choice, among one or two other positions that tend to unsettle the GOP-base which he would need strong support from to win. While he has passed legislation against late-term abortions, and favors civil unions instead of full blown gay marriage, and these nuances certainly help him in this respect, Ron Paul is more appealing in this sense. Obama's failings and other developments have also made Ron Paul out to be much more credible this time around in his positions, where in 2008 there were numerous attempts by the media and even the guy administering the first Republican general debate to make him out as a complete loon. He was marginalized and he wasn't even invited to the 2nd debate, he is getting everything ready and filled out ahead of time this time to ensure this does not occur again. As far as Ron Paul's foreign policy, re: Brian, I most certainly do have some strong gripes with some of his views regarding foreign policy, but I will also admit that in many respects with the military he would get us on the right track in areas Obama had promised to do so and, to no one's surprise, fell through on. We also know that he is as serious as any candidate can be about reducing the debt, getting our financial house in order, and minimizing the economic fallout in the future as much as possible given what power would be available to either of them as President. o This whole Gary Johnson, Ron Paul on seperate tickets thing is just another round of the Libertarian's shooting themselves in the foot and being their own worst enemy once again. If they were together they could nullify to a large extent the parts of either of them that the GOP, Independents, and very disillusioned liberals would find problems with. Ron Paul is more appealing to the GOP, Johnson could, would, and if he continues, undoubtedly will capture a large percentage of the independent vote, which I think is where he is strongest. The religious and foreign policy parts Johnson nulls out, the more liberal positions on civil and social issues (marriage/abortion/etc.) of his would be lessened by Ron Paul being on the same ticket. I have a friend that recently wrote a blog posting about this very issue and compared them: http://bonniekristian.com/paul-vs-johnson-or-we-actually-have-two-palatable-options/ I am in the exact same position. If it came down to it, and the candidate wasn't just plain awful I would vote them to make sure Obama gets out, but it really is amazing how a country with so many great people as ours has so little to offer in decent candidates. Hell, half of them are the GOP, Republican-authoritarian status-quo nutjobs from the last election. It's embarrassing, pathetic, and depressing. I will put as much weight as I can behind Paul this time around unless some magic candidate comes out of nowhere because he seems to be the only non-status quo Republican candidate that actually has a chance at getting a nomination, even if it is slimmer than I would prefer its the best chance he will get. If Obama wins again, then if nothing else I can hope for a potential Gary Johnson and quite possibly even a Rand Paul run in 2016, and I think Rand Paul could definitely make it to Presidency in 2016 depending on the candidates and events prior.

Ideally, I am hoping for Ron Paul/Gary Johnson combined ticket or the other way around.

So...e-mailing or private messaging it on here wouldn't cut it? Also, I agree word for word with Aequalsa's post right above mine.

Rorschach Doesn't Shrug The Watchmen's hero as Objectivist saint Found this posted by someone else on my facebook homepage: http://reason.com/archives/2009/03/06/rorschach-doesnt-shrug I have never seen the movie, I never had heard of it until the movie in fact.

So..like the already developed Free State Project in New Hampshire? http://freestateproject.org/

Absolutely agree. On occasion I find a good article but the internet sites I frequent have a much better ratio of quality articles with better fact checking. Only reason I have this issue is because my family subscribes to TIME and a bunch of other magazines. I usually read these when I am around...in the bathroom, to keep up on what the mainstream magazines that so many people are reading are saying. I just found this article too hilarious (in a bad sense) to not share here.

I found this wonderful (sarcasm) piece in my latest issue of TIME magazine. Thoughts? Three lovely quotes: "So many companies will be rushing in to provide health insurance to aging boomer's that the competition should keep the price of premiums from rising much. "There is no evidence of that," says Yale School of Management professor Fiona Scott Morton, "There really isn't. We have many uninsured people who are paying out of pocket for things, and it's not driving down prices." "But the game doesn't work in our favor all the time. The airline industry is crazy competitive, right? Except that fares have increased nine times since mid-December. You may notice that having 4 (gas) service stations within 2 blocks of one another hasn't noticeably lowered the price at the pump. Cable and satellite-television providers are constantly attacking each other in their advertising. Has your cable bill retreated over the past 5 years? "Nowhere in the Adam Smith rule book does it say that prices have to come down every time new competitors show up." http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2066767,00.html

I wouldn't mind being involved in one of these as well if there are enough people willing. This one is from 2006.

Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson is holding a money bomb (for those that don't know, this is what they call grassroots fundraising events for campaign funds) today by the way: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/ Just click donate now on the top right.

I can agree with this. The results are the same, however I would say the journey is categorically different.

Because during my clueless angsty teenage period, I was a nihilist for a year and 2 months and I was a "member" of the most organized nihilist group on the net. Perhaps my understanding of nihilism and "nihilistic tendencies" is not the same as yours as a result. He shows no signs of what I am referring to.

He is a social democrat, he obviously wants to replace it with something. So the answer to your question is no. The answer to the threads question is no, he is not at all a nihilist and I have to wonder why someone who knows what that term means would claim that he is one. It seems absurd to me, personally. I have not seen this use of the term though myself so maybe context can clarify. I would still consider it improper use of the term though, most likely.

This is the best Objectivist-written review I have come across thus far: http://thewildwebster.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/shrugged-part1-first-impressions/ Also something most certainly related no one has brought up yet: Randex has 32 new articles on Ayn Rand: 10 ✓ positive, 10 ✖ negative, 2 ✓✖ mixed, and 10 neutral. See them all at http://randex.org/.

I mostly posted this because he is one of the most well-known movie critics in the U.S. and many, many people will probably, unfortunately, be looking to his review to decide if they are going or will go if they were on the fence and perhaps not an Objectivist but a Libertarian or Conservative or if they aren't any of those things, so as to give a snapshot of how the professional reviewers might be going with this. He did mention how he thought those that have read the book and are probably even Objectivists might feel about it in the latter part. These are the parts I found most noteworthy: I found out it is playing in Davenport now as well, which is about a half hour drive or so from me. I may end up seeing it next weekend.

Yeah I would have to drive several hours to get to the nearest one to me.

Famed Movie Critic Roger Ebert gave Atlas Shrugged 1 Star: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20110414%2FREVIEWS%2F110419990 For those that don't live in the United States. Roger Ebert is one of the most well-known if not the most well-known (I am not sure which is more accurate) movie critic in the United States, so this is not a good start to things as far as the general audience is concerned.