Capitalism Forever

Fair enough. Stripped of the lyrics, I agree that the mere music of her songs would be meaningless.

The name of the song is "Overprotected." The music is just as, um, Britney-ish as her other songs.

I'll go further than that and say that a film that portrays the Jews as responsible for the death of Jesus actually sends, from my point of view, a PRO-Jewish message... (Besides, from the POV of the New Testament, weren't those who killed Jesus doing the will of God?----I'm not one of those who enjoy ridiculing people's sacred beliefs, but come on, if your religion is built upon self-contradiction, some things are bound to be funny about it...!)

I'm not quite sure I appreciate that... My evaluation of the site's creator: RATIONAL SELF-INTEREST LEVEL 02 (0-4): above-average. A mixed bag of genuine wisdom & childish follies. Aware of Primacy of Existence; recognizes supremacy of reason & morality of self-interest. Understands concept of individual responsibility, but in denial about free will. Makes many epistemological mistakes. Often places hatred of evil before love of self. Reads too much libertarian propaganda re Iraq. Has potential but needs maturing.

Actually, I think there is quite a LOT of meaning in this : (I realize that it is just the lyrics and not the music that carries the meaning, though.)

I share your on that. It appears to me that he wants to stabilize Iraq first and then move on to Iran. That is not how I would do things; given that much of the "instability" in Iraq may be coming out of Iran, it would be better to defeat Iran (and Syria, and Arafat) first and then worry about stability. So yes, Bush is moving way too cautiously, but at least he's moving. If he gets reelected, he will overthrow the Mullahs sooner or later. OTOH if Kerry wins, the Iranian regime will stay in place, the UN will be recognized as the "boss" of America, and if you think that Medicare thing was bad...well let me not continue. As I said, Kerry means death--death for the victims of the likely Iranian nuclear attack, and death for the United States as the world's freest nation.

How can you say that?? It is like saying that Israelis and Palestinians are moral equivalents just because Israel is far from being a perfect Objectivist society. Yes, Bush is far from being perfect, and some of his policies make our lives much worse than they could be if we had an Objectivist President. However: 1. There is no Objectivist Presidential candidate. 2. John Kerry is hell bent on eradicating all hints of independence, all shimmers of pride, all forms of individual wealth, all traces of capitalism, and all buds of rational self-interest from the United States of America. Never underestimate the depravity of liberals. While conservatives are weak-willed, timid, vacillating defenders of--"some degree of"--capitalism, tormented by doubts, misled by compassion, and mired in pragmatism, liberals are like rabid jackals, with a total lack of scruples and not the slightest inclination to show mercy. They hate the world and hate it with a vengeance; they differ only in their strategy, but not in their goal, from the suicide terrorists.

From www.johnkerry.com: Kerry's e-mail to Iran 'Senator Kerry would seek direct talks with Iran' An Open Letter To Senator John Kerry (from the Iranian Student Movement)

Signing a libertarian-sponsored statement is not something John Galt would do either.

Kerry: Terrorist Shiite Al-Sadr 'a Legitimate Voice' Gen. Giap: Kerry's Group Helped Hanoi Defeat U.S. Kerry: Some Bush budget cuts 'almost criminal' 1994: John Kerry championed nomination of activist who declared he hated intelligence agencies Wal-Mart opponents get big boost [from Heinz Endowments]

OK, now for a little humor break:

John Kerry wants to "cooperate" with the Iranian regime. THIS ALONE is enough proof that he is, in fact, an "evil emperor." And that's only the tip of the iceberg... Bush is a disaster. Kerry is death. Vote disaster.

A vote simply means that I think the guy I vote for is the best, or least bad, among the viable candidates. IOW, a vote for Bush means that I think Bush is not as bad as Kerry. It does not mean that I think Bush is good. You can support a candidate in a number of different ways: by giving him campaign money, by showing up on his rallies, by having a bumper sticker that pokes fun at his opponent, etc. What I think Halley meant by "support," though, is to agree with his philosophical views and his strategy for the nation.

A nice way of putting it! The rational answer to altruism is to take up the altruists on their offer--BIG TIME. As Abraham Lincoln said: "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly."

As any true capitalist knows, "overcharging" is not a valid concept. More evidence that Libertarians are not true capitalists. That's a sure sign of an irrational person. Rather than grasp the principles and remember a couple of facts to name as examples, the irrational argumentator memorizes tomes of (irrelevant and redundant) data and floods you with them in order to overwhelm you. (One more thing Libertarians seem to have in common with Marxists...) Once you have found out that a person will not listen to rational arguments, it is a waste of time to try to convince them. Since their goal in the argument is to make a specific point and NOT to find out the truth and adjust their views according to it, they will never quit trying to make that point, NO MATTER the truth.

FYI, Francis: We do not like Libertarians on this forum. Besides, we all know what Harry Browne thinks about the cause of Islamic attacks, and we totally disagree with him. This is a forum for Objectivists, stundents of Objectivism, and people genuinely interested in Objectivism. If you are neither of the three, and all you do is post ideas opposed to Objectivism, you will not be welcome here. So, if you are familiar with the basics of Objectivism (you can read them at www.aynrand.org) and are interested in learning more, post the points where you need clarifications or explanations in the form of questions. Do NOT simply state your disagreement--that will get you banned very quickly.

THAT's why I support Israel.

Fair enough. Let me rewrite my previous sentence, then: Empty space does have at least one attribute: to wit, it has the capacity to hold material objects.

Shalom, Dolev!

Yup, that's Hillary all right! I haven't read the complete essay, but the parts you have quoted seem to be quite convincing. The key point is this: I am interested in your stunning counter-argument, though!

I hate them!

It certainly did in Hungary.

It's a rather lame attempt to argue against the empirical evidence of the superiority of capitalism. It is clear that nations of Western Europe, let alone the United States, were much better off while Eastern Europe was under socialism. The transition to a freer market is a bumpy ride, for sure--and the lefties, desperate for any crumb of reality to support their irrational beliefs, like to point to these bumps and exclaim triumphantly, "See, here we have an instance of capitalism causing some difficulties for some people!" Imagine Beavis doing an IQ test and accidentally getting one of the answers right. "Uh, huhuh, look Butt-Head, I'm uh, like, a genius!"

Exactly. As I mentioned on another thread a couple of days ago, the no-speed-limit Autobahns in Germany are safer than the roads in other countries.

"May I have the serenity to..."