"atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics

[MaggieMae]

incredible... you get it... this is gold... you have single handedly defined "the american people"

liberals: mindless and ignorant masses, lazy and entitled to a such a gross degree it is difficult to say whether they or the primary antagonists are the embodiment of the evil Rand suggests exists.

conservatives: knowing, understanding, and even demanding the ideals represented by her protagonists and shows them as being frequently moved into action, like in the frequent abandonment of jobs, including railroad jobs, by many people across Rand's United States.

i'm taking this to madison

Don't quit your day job. You left out that conservatives generally are CEOs of major corporations who are ONLY interested in profit, and fuck the workers who help them get there. This kind of attitude was rare in Ayn Rand's day, by the way. Also, I don't see anyone "abandoning their jobs" today because of 'ideology'. Those same CEOs eliminate jobs in order to hire cheap labor across the pond or import technical talent using H-IB visas. Hello?

this is my day job mm

Then either someone/thing supports your lifestyle of posting opinions on message boards all day, you're collecting some government benefit(s), or you're rich enough to have a holier-than-thou attitude and able to look down on others less fortunate. Aren't you lucky.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Our representatives (republicanism) generally are elected democratically, with certain exceptions such as the Electoral College. Which you know. But you are not interested in the constitutional republic, but only power.

But you are not interested in the constitutional republic, but only power

REALLY? Unlike you I am not the one that calls America a democracy, deomcratic republic, or a social democracy. All are controlled by the majority, they are mob rule. You will only see me address America as a Constitutional Republic. Because the officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.

But of course your elected official(s) represent a lot of other people, not just YOU.

and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. Meaning the minority rights are also protected.

 

[washamericom]

Ok, I 've read about Ayn Rand for 5 minutes, now I'm an expert. Let's discuss the mystery of her appeal to Conservatives, starting with this:

My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.

—Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

Anyone?

i have found that in life; sometimes it will take more than five minutes to absorb the essece of a philosophy or religion, or really, any complex theory. do you feel left out because you never read it and everyone is talking about it? or have you copped an undisciplined uninformed attitude. if you feel left out than good, that was th essence of my original post. if you don't read it because conservatives like it, isn't that the same as refusing to watch fox news.? you've got to love yourself before you can love another.

Weren't you the one who said you "hadn't read it" and were "waiting for the movie"?? If it wasn't you, I apologize.

i was joking, i'm the o p

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I wrote, "Capitalism is economics, bigreb, while social democracy is a reform movement. Neither conflicts with the constitutional Republic. Let's review for you: (1) the Constitution is the ultimate law of the land; (2) a Republic is governed by republican representation, the election of representatives by the people. You with me on this?"

Stay with what I wrote, bud, and tell me how that conflicts with a constitutional republic?

Democracy majority rule mob rule
conflicts with
Constitutional Republic, Rule by law.
BUB

Then there was "mob rule" by the right for six years of the Bush Administration. What is your point? Actually, your point should have been that government works best when there is NOT a majority party in power; that's where compromise happens and stuff actually gets done.

Democracy majority rule you don't like that part do you

 

[MaggieMae]

You are ignoring the constitutional and factual reality that "(2) a Republic is governed by republican representation, the election of representatives by the people. "

Americans will not permit militia soviets, bigreb, in the U.S., because that is what you are implying.

Section 4.


The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

The founders didn't mean the Republican PARTY, a/k/a the GOP. At the time of the signing of The Constitution, there were only two parties: The Federalists and (ironically) the Democratic-Republican Party! It wasn't until early in the 20th Century that the Democrats and Republicans split into the two parties we now know. Geesh--do some homework.

 

[washamericom]

REALLY? Unlike you I am not the one that calls America a democracy, deomcratic republic, or a social democracy. All are controlled by the majority, they are mob rule. You will only see me address America as a Constitutional Republic. Because the officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens.

But of course your elected official(s) represent a lot of other people, not just YOU.

and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. Meaning the minority rights are also protected.

i think wisconsin is a good example. the democrat party and the publik unions were outmaneuvered, and they didn't like it. just as we were outmaneuvered by the big three obama reid pelosi) over healthcare, we didn't like it, but it was legal (not very ethical)
this all according to the law, and subsequent judicial review (if necessary)
by the way good catch on "they didn't mean the republican party" i was dangling a literal motzaball. u r sharp maggie

 

[MaggieMae]

I mean the world is not a simple place of this good, that bad, him left, her right. We do not live in a world where all people's attitudes, beliefs, actions, etc. tightly revolve around the the poles. We live in a world where Republicans support abortion rights and Democrats support tougher border security. We live in a society that dislikes when people revolve around those poles; we call such people extremists and with the exception of those extremists themselves we universally reject extremism.

Well that too. Forgive me for getting too Randian with my own explanation!

that's funny, i can aleways count on you for a good discussion.

what if i said we live in a world where democrats deny right to life.
but i think in the case of the movie, it's more about business than abortion.

Now this thread has been reduced to wedge issues? What does abortion have to do with any of this? And just fyi, there are PLENTY of Democrats who do not believe in abortion; I'm one of them. But I do get that it's a woman's choice. I mean, seriously? Ironically, what you people are ALL about is personal choice--except when it comes to that particular issue. I don't get the "ideology" behind that at all.

 

[MaggieMae]

I can't wait until this movie comes out, France would not allow it to be written in the French language, they certainly felt threatened by it, but they should as it shows the evils of socialism. I think Obama needs to read it.

I hope that all of you conservatives and independents take your voting age children to see this movie. It will change them from mush heads that believe anything they hear and see and turn them into critical thinkers of government policy and the fallacies that are being promoted today by a very liberal bunch of mush heads who happen to be in the executive office.

I hear it was a businessman that invested 10 million dollars to make this movie. Please pass this information on to all of your contacts and urge them to see it. It makes you think and think critically.

Obama probably read it many years ago. Ironically, depending on the age of the children, they may come away from the movie scratching their heads and asking mommy whether or not daddy plans to quit his job just so he can make a point, or if daddy does quit his job, how will I eat? Will I still be able to get a new I-Pod?

or if daddy quits his job to be president, even after saying he wouldn't.... just to make his point.
most of the arguing i haer doesn't deliniate between selfish and selfless, it's all in the book.

Now you're not making any sense. Put the bong down and get some rest.

 

[MaggieMae]

Ayn Rand is perhaps one of the worst authors I've ever wasted my time on. I got through 3/4ths of the Fountainhead before I tossed the book where it belonged..the trash.

It's comforting to know that before she died..she, like many Americans, had to rely on SSI because she went broke due to Medical expenses.

The irony was thick with this one.

So did my ex-husband who was uber conservative. Even before he got sick, however, that didn't stop him from gaming the system whenever he could, i.e., applying for an additional Social Security card so he could work under the table and only declare the meager income he did have to report, then write-off made up expenses. Yeah, he was a real piece of work, but Nixon and Reagan were his HEROES!! When he did get sick, he not only got food stamps, MediCal coverage and utilities assistance, but his rent was subsidized. I suspect if my ex-husband were still alive, he'd be one of those Californians screaming his head off over how much in debt the California government is because of those goddamned slackers living off welfare.

you let this guy get away? i mean is he still living ?
and all the hatered towards corporations, do the people who have a lower job on the totem pole resent management ?

 

[Samson]

The founders didn't mean the Republican PARTY, a/k/a the GOP. At the time of the signing of The Constitution, there were only two parties: The Federalists and (ironically) the Democratic-Republican Party! It wasn't until early in the 20th Century that the Democrats and Republicans split into the two parties we now know. Geesh--do some homework.

Um...the Republican Party was founded in 1854.

THE 19th Century.
As usual YOU are the one that needs to do some homework: Intellectual Lightweight.

You're fucking pitiful.

 

[MaggieMae]

I can't wait until this movie comes out, France would not allow it to be written in the French language, they certainly felt threatened by it, but they should as it shows the evils of socialism. I think Obama needs to read it.

I hope that all of you conservatives and independents take your voting age children to see this movie. It will change them from mush heads that believe anything they hear and see and turn them into critical thinkers of government policy and the fallacies that are being promoted today by a very liberal bunch of mush heads who happen to be in the executive office.

I hear it was a businessman that invested 10 million dollars to make this movie. Please pass this information on to all of your contacts and urge them to see it. It makes you think and think critically.

Obama probably read it many years ago. Ironically, depending on the age of the children, they may come away from the movie scratching their heads and asking mommy whether or not daddy plans to quit his job just so he can make a point, or if daddy does quit his job, how will I eat? Will I still be able to get a new I-Pod?

And you base this assumption on what evidence? Most college students or professors EVER read Ayn Rand. She's darn near persona non grata in the colleges these days.

I had to choose to read it on my own as an adult and that was only after someone tipped me off that it was an interesting read. The Fountainhead took me 4 tries before I finally got into it, and then I LOVED it, regardless of it's stilted nature. Atlas Shrugged I consumed in 4 days as hard as it was to read the whole John Galt Speaks section... MAN that was dry.

I had to read it in high school. Perhaps most college professors are silly enough to believe that it still might happen that high school students get a good education. I read it as part of my Economics 101 course over a six-month period, where we had pop quizzes on the chapters as they applied to known applications.

 

[MaggieMae]

I see very little evidence on this board that most of you who claim this book and think it is your idea of a brilliant social commentary ever read it.

I think many of you know the Title, know that your masters told you it is brilliant and are trying to fake you love for it on this board.

Some of you so self-proclaiming cons have read it, no doubt, but I doubt all of you here testifying how good it is really did.

Becase as many of you proved to me time after time that you don't read much of anything, I seriously doubt many of you waded though that deadingly boring, bloated politically science screed.

Truner Dairies, that's I'd believe most of you cons might wade through.

But Atlas Shrugged?

Not a chance.




I think many of you so called freedom loving cons are basically liars.

ask me anything... i don't know your "truner diaries"

have you read it ? are you saying it's a bad book/philosophy ?

If the shoe I cobbled doesn't fit you, there's no need to protest that your toes are pinched, Wash.

I don't doubt some of you self proclaiming conservatives have waded though that deadly long, screed plagued tome.

But when people here whose writing suggests that they never read anything serious, suddently start telling us how brillant ATLAS SHRUGGED is, I am more than just a little dubious.

I haven't read A.S since about '64, so no pop quiz will be forthcoming.

At the time I read it, of course, I loved it.

Of course, at the time I was a kid, too, and like most kids didn't know how the world really worked or how REAL PEOPLE WHO ARENT CARDBOARD CUT OUT LITERALY CHARACTERS act, either.

You know, much like Ayn Rand obviously never really understood human nature, and how most Libertarians notwits don't, too?

The woman was mad as a hatter, far as I can tell.

Mad as a hatter but crazy like a fox, as me mother might have put it

Same thing with The Fountainhead. The adolescent mind thinks the highlight is when the hero blows up his own building. And that makes it a great book. When my brother first read "Gone With the Wind," the most exciting part to him was the burning of Atlanta. Of course he was only 16 when he read it and the ramifications of the Civil War hadn't been absorbed yet.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

But of course your elected official(s) represent a lot of other people, not just YOU.

and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. Meaning the minority rights are also protected.

i think wisconsin is a good example. the democrat party and the publik unions were outmaneuvered, and they didn't like it. just as we were outmaneuvered by the big three obama reid pelosi) over healthcare, we didn't like it, but it was legal (not very ethical)
this all according to the law, and subsequent judicial review (if necessary)
by the way good catch on "they didn't mean the republican party" i was dangling a literal motzaball. u r sharp maggie

Healthcare coverage is not protected in the bill of rights or is a part of the Constitution, nor can the government force the citizens of America to buy a product.

 

[Big Fitz]

Obama probably read it many years ago. Ironically, depending on the age of the children, they may come away from the movie scratching their heads and asking mommy whether or not daddy plans to quit his job just so he can make a point, or if daddy does quit his job, how will I eat? Will I still be able to get a new I-Pod?

And you base this assumption on what evidence? Most college students or professors EVER read Ayn Rand. She's darn near persona non grata in the colleges these days.

I had to choose to read it on my own as an adult and that was only after someone tipped me off that it was an interesting read. The Fountainhead took me 4 tries before I finally got into it, and then I LOVED it, regardless of it's stilted nature. Atlas Shrugged I consumed in 4 days as hard as it was to read the whole John Galt Speaks section... MAN that was dry.

I had to read it in high school. Perhaps most college professors are silly enough to believe that it still might happen that high school students get a good education. I read it as part of my Economics 101 course over a six-month period, where we had pop quizzes on the chapters as they applied to known applications.

Amazing. Most public school kids like me never even heard of the book.

 

[Big Fitz]

ask me anything... i don't know your "truner diaries"

have you read it ? are you saying it's a bad book/philosophy ?

If the shoe I cobbled doesn't fit you, there's no need to protest that your toes are pinched, Wash.

I don't doubt some of you self proclaiming conservatives have waded though that deadly long, screed plagued tome.

But when people here whose writing suggests that they never read anything serious, suddently start telling us how brillant ATLAS SHRUGGED is, I am more than just a little dubious.

I haven't read A.S since about '64, so no pop quiz will be forthcoming.

At the time I read it, of course, I loved it.

Of course, at the time I was a kid, too, and like most kids didn't know how the world really worked or how REAL PEOPLE WHO ARENT CARDBOARD CUT OUT LITERALY CHARACTERS act, either.

You know, much like Ayn Rand obviously never really understood human nature, and how most Libertarians notwits don't, too?

The woman was mad as a hatter, far as I can tell.

Mad as a hatter but crazy like a fox, as me mother might have put it

Same thing with The Fountainhead. The adolescent mind thinks the highlight is when the hero blows up his own building. And that makes it a great book. When my brother first read "Gone With the Wind," the most exciting part to him was the burning of Atlanta. Of course he was only 16 when he read it and the ramifications of the Civil War hadn't been absorbed yet.

It's like a friend from college joked: "Citizen Kane would have been the perfect movie if they had just exploded one truck!"

 

[washamericom]

that's funny about citizen kane... i can't believe shallow read 800 pages then threw it out, that's tasty

 

[Big Fitz]

The founders didn't mean the Republican PARTY, a/k/a the GOP. At the time of the signing of The Constitution, there were only two parties: The Federalists and (ironically) the Democratic-Republican Party! It wasn't until early in the 20th Century that the Democrats and Republicans split into the two parties we now know. Geesh--do some homework.

Um...the Republican Party was founded in 1854.

THE 19th Century.
As usual YOU are the one that needs to do some homework: Intellectual Lightweight.

You're fucking pitiful.

Gotta love the Election of 1860. 4 major candidates and the shambles of the Whig party, states rights, slavery and secession in the balance. The election of Lincoln guaranteed a civil war after the mess that Buchanan left when leaving office. I love Buchanan's quote to Lincoln as they met briefly to change power:

"If you are as happy a man to take the office of President as I am to leave it, you are a very happy man!"

 

[Sarah G]

There's a miniseries starting 3-27. Mildred Pierce.

Now THAT looks really good, whatever happened to miniseries' anyway?

 

[gekaap]

i have found that in life; sometimes it will take more than five minutes to absorb the essece of a philosophy or religion, or really, any complex theory. do you feel left out because you never read it and everyone is talking about it? or have you copped an undisciplined uninformed attitude. if you feel left out than good, that was th essence of my original post. if you don't read it because conservatives like it, isn't that the same as refusing to watch fox news.? you've got to love yourself before you can love another.

o_0 Are you intentionally missing the sarcasm?

 

[gekaap]

...what if one is most happy when one is also unproductive?

See, that's the problem with Rand. Ultimately she's forced to accept contradictions, or be rejected completely.