Agit8r
Gold Member
- Dec 4, 2010
- 12,141
- 2,209
- 245
Next to the bible I think this is the best book ever written.
the two books are completely incompatible
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Next to the bible I think this is the best book ever written.
Therein lies the tale.[...]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.
[...]
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.
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.
There is no evidence to support your lie, thank you for trolling
[
Not expecting an apology..but..
Ayn Rand Railed Against Government Benefits, But Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet
Ayn Rand, socialist | Michael Tomasky | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
Cynical-C | Ayn Rand Received Social Security
this is your last chance to read the book before the movie comes out.
i have waited my whole life for this. when i was in high school i discovered ayn rand, it changed my life , and much to my delight, would end up in a conservative website framed by objectivism.
i remember thinking, someday, once the internet is invented, this will be my political philosohpy and i will take it to the people..
life imitates art. we are dagney taggert and hank rearden (the protagonists) and the democratic party (led by one barrak obama... if that is your real name), is the government, and "mr. thompson".
you are going to be seeing and hearing and feeling atlas shrugged a lot in the coming time until the 2012 election.
as wonderfual as the original novel is, no, magnificient... the movie will better present to the masses, that big government is not only wrong, in this country, according to our constitution, it is immoral.
i further suggest that this hollywood production will play a large roll in unseating the president of obama, how ultimately and deliciously ironic. how do you like us now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W07bFa4TzM
it looks good, no, great.
you and your fellow right wing conservatives believe in a dog eat dog mentality and work diligently to assure that a smalll portion of the populace reap GREAT REWARDS while MILLIONS living in poverty
is that so wrong ?
Is it wrong to work to assure that millions live in poverty?
Yes, it is.
What kind of fucked up world do you live in?
You neocons LIKE that the manly "producers" drop off the grid and form a commune in the end? Because that's exactly what they effing do! You like that do you, hippies?
shhhhh, i haven't seen it yet
Thanks for illustrating your logical fallacy. Just because one believs one's own self interest should be served first, is not the same thing as attempting to make sure everyone else stays poor.
The problem with you Rand bashers is your mischaracterization of her beliefs. You equate serving one's own interests with hurting others.
shhhhh, i haven't seen it yet
You didn't read the book? It's neocon soft porn (very soft).
Thanks for illustrating your logical fallacy. Just because one believs one's own self interest should be served first, is not the same thing as attempting to make sure everyone else stays poor.
Look around you... that is EXACTLY what is happening right now.
And who are the people "hurting" and being asked to sacrifice? It's teachers, the working poor and the middle class, that's who. American workers, that's who. It sure ain't Wall Street executives or anyone in the top 2% - they get continued tax relief while the rest are left go under water.
who reads books anymore. see the movie you're in and out in two hours. (or four if it's a two parter)
you and your fellow right wing conservatives believe in a dog eat dog mentality and work diligently to assure that a smalll portion of the populace reap GREAT REWARDS while MILLIONS living in poverty
is that so wrong ?
Is it wrong to work to assure that millions live in poverty?
Yes, it is.
What kind of fucked up world do you live in?
Thanks for illustrating your logical fallacy. Just because one believs one's own self interest should be served first, is not the same thing as attempting to make sure everyone else stays poor.
The problem with you Rand bashers is your mischaracterization of her beliefs. You equate serving one's own interests with hurting others.
The funny part is, you assumed the answer to "if its wrong to work diligently to ensure that millions live in poverty." Is automatically 'no'. The question is an incomplete thought if you actually read the book.Is it wrong to work to assure that millions live in poverty?
Yes, it is.
What kind of fucked up world do you live in?
Thanks for illustrating your logical fallacy. Just because one believs one's own self interest should be served first, is not the same thing as attempting to make sure everyone else stays poor.
Eh, the poster asked if its wrong to work diligently to ensure that millions live in poverty. You should take up your complaint with him/her.
The problem with you Rand bashers is your mischaracterization of her beliefs. You equate serving one's own interests with hurting others.
The problem with you Rand lovers is that you make shit up, whole cloth. I said nothing at all similar - or in any way related - to the tripe you wrote above.
Is it wrong to work to assure that millions live in poverty?
Yes, it is.
What kind of fucked up world do you live in?
Thanks for illustrating your logical fallacy. Just because one believs one's own self interest should be served first, is not the same thing as attempting to make sure everyone else stays poor.
Eh, the poster asked if its wrong to work diligently to ensure that millions live in poverty. You should take up your complaint with him/her.
The problem with you Rand bashers is your mischaracterization of her beliefs. You equate serving one's own interests with hurting others.
The problem with you Rand lovers is that you make shit up, whole cloth. I said nothing at all similar - or in any way related - to the tripe you wrote above.
Then perhaps it's both of you that are wrong. I believe wash is being sarcastic. and I think you are being serious. The problem is the premise. IF people were attaining wealth by hurting others that would be bad, but that is not reality. The accumulation of wealth does not necessitate one hurting another.