Rand was right, Ayn that is

[JakeStarkey]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand

its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

You and Ayn are backward in thinking: that is all.

Backward thinking people don't make cogent arguments, they just use ad hominems.

The far right is ad hom ville. Thanks!

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think it is too late.

After 50 years of the Great Society and the War on Poverty, and after 6 years of Obama...a full third are on some sort of Government Dole...and Lord knows how many are on the Big Government Dole--members of Public Employee Unions.

We need to quit paying the non-producers to have babies, and start paying them not to get pregnant to begin with.

And Lois Lerner needs to go to Jail.

No, that's 47% on some sort of government dole,

Veterans are on the dole?

SS and Medicare recipients are on the dole?

You whine about 87% of welfare goes to support of your children?

Get out of my GOP, jerkwad. You types are losing us elections.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I agree with Rand's sentiment, but do not accept her "cure" for the ills under which we are currently suffering.

Her solution is far from the best one. She is just as extremist as those she spoke of.

Gee, a far left whackdoodle like you not accepting Rand's ideas - who would have guessed...

Gee a republican that swallows Ayn Rand whole and cannot find one issue of disagreement with her. Who would've guessed?

Not a real Republican.

 

[jillian]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand


its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

 

[bripat9643]

I think it is too late.

After 50 years of the Great Society and the War on Poverty, and after 6 years of Obama...a full third are on some sort of Government Dole...and Lord knows how many are on the Big Government Dole--members of Public Employee Unions.

We need to quit paying the non-producers to have babies, and start paying them not to get pregnant to begin with.

And Lois Lerner needs to go to Jail.

Secession is the only solution. Government will never reform itself.

 

[bripat9643]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand


its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

She wasn't broke, moron, and she collected SS because the law compelled her to pay for it. I love this libturd theory that only people who support government programs are entitled to their benefits.

 

[JakeStarkey]

poor bripat the wahnarkist

stay on the OP son is all you are asked to do

'sides, anarchists want to see the system topple

 

[ClosedCaption]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand


its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

She wasn't broke, moron, and she collected SS because the law compelled her to pay for it. I love this libturd theory that only people who support government programs are entitled to their benefits.

Thats not why she collected it, she collected it because she needed it. Paying for it doesnt mean she has to abandon principals and take it.

 

[bripat9643]

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

She wasn't broke, moron, and she collected SS because the law compelled her to pay for it. I love this libturd theory that only people who support government programs are entitled to their benefits.

Thats not why she collected it, she collected it because she needed it. Paying for it doesnt mean she has to abandon principals and take it.

Wrong. Your simply another lying libturd. And collecting benefits the government forced her to pay for wasn't violating her principles. That's pure libturd propaganda:

Classically Liberal: Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security

I was asked by someone about a new attack on Rand, which some of the rabid haters on the Left were doing, alleging some sort of hypocrisy by Rand for "taking social security." Some childish writer at the rather unreliable AlterNet wrote an article entitled: "Ayn Rand Railed Against Government Benefits, But Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

The article claimed "Rand herself received Social Security payments and Medicare benefits under the name of Ann O'Connor." O'Connor was her married name but her given name was Alice not Ann, but then facts are not important to the smearbund.

The author quotes Michael Ford of the "Center for the Study of the American Dream," saying, "In the end, Miss Rand was a hypocrite but she could never be faulted for failing to act in her own self-interest." (I suggest "own self-interest" is redundant. What other kind of self-interest is there?)

I found this odd since Rand had commented that people who are forced to fund government programs are NOT immoral for taking the benefits for which they paid. For instance, it is not wrong for people to attend government schools, which are funded with their tax monies, whether they like it or not. They have to start with a false premise: that Rand said receiving Social Security, that one is forced to pay for, was wrong. Without that false claim they have no charge of hypocrisy. They pretend she took a position she never took and then accuse her of violating the position she didn't take.

in 1966 Rand's Objectivist Newsletter said that not collecting from programs that one is forced to finance would be wrong. It said:

...the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

The AlterNet smear also claimed that Rand said that the link between smoking and cancer was a hoax. She actually never said that. She said she was not convinced that the case had been made, and at the time it hadn't been fully made. She never said it was a hoax and she stopped smoking instantly when her physician showed her a dark spot on her own lung's x-ray.

According to AlterNet one Evva Joan Pryor, "who had been a social worker in New Yorker" said that "I remember telling her that this was going to be difficult. For me to do my job she had to recognize that there were exceptions to her theory." What job was that? Well, if you believe AlterNet she was "social worker" during this period. The implication being that Rand had to seek out a social worker to help her. Some smear-mongers of Rand have argued with me that she died penniless as the result of the evils of capitalism and that was why she sought out this social worker.

Pryor was NOT a social worker. She worked for the law firm of Ernst, Crane Gitlin & Winick which handled all legal matters for Rand. Nor was Rand penniless or in need. She was penniless when she arrived in America but during this period she had cash reserves of a few hundred thousand dollars and a steady income from book royalties.

Pryor argued with Rand because Ayn did not want Social Security, nor did Rand go out and seek it, or Medicare, even though doing so was entirely consistent with her own ethics. What Pryor said was that she tried to convince Rand to sign up and they argued. Pryor says Rand "was never involved other than to sign the power of attorney. I did the rest." Beyond that Pryor said nothing else. There is no indication whether Pryor used the power of attorney to apply for benefits, or whether Rand knew about it. There is no indication that such benefits were ever used. There is simply no evidence to show Rand "Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

Pryor's full interview in 100 Voices: Oral History of Ayn Rand, indicates the opposite. It shows Rand fighting with her attorneys and telling them that she didn't want to do this. She signed a power of attorney and Pryor said that she acted "whether [Ayn] agreed or not." Pryor never actually says what actions she (Pryor) took in spite of whether Ayn "agreed or not." What we have is the rabid Left jumping to numerous conclusions not warranted by the evidence.

So, there are numerous things wrong with these claims. First, it would not be hypocrisy if Rand did take benefits from programs that she was forced to fund. Second, Rand clearly didn't "grab" any such benefits but fought her own attorneys about doing so and they, not she, were the ones pushing it. Third, there is no indication she actually got any benefits because Pryor doesn't say. And, fourth, Pryor makes it clear that she acted as Rand's attorney on health issues even when Rand didn't agree with her. And fifth, there is no indication that Rand knew all of the decisions that Pryor made on her behalf. Perhaps she did, but perhaps she didn't.

Rand had sufficient resources to cover the health issues she faced. In fact, she had sufficient funds to pay for heart surgery for her brother-in-law from Russia. Rand's estate had a substantial sum of cash at the time of Rand's death indicating that Pryor's concerns that health costs could "bankrupt" Rand never took place. And, since Pryor argued that Rand should have these things in case health care bankrupted her, it is entirely possible that Rand never got a cent. We just don't know. But if she did, there is nothing to attack her over either.

 

[f252863]

You and Ayn are backward in thinking: that is all.

Backward thinking people don't make cogent arguments, they just use ad hominems.

The far right is ad hom ville. Thanks!

Translation:

Other people make this mistake, ergo, I should commit to the same error.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So she had excuses why being on the tit is cool. Awesome

 

[f252863]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand


its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

Died broke?

She died with an estate worth $550,000 in 1982 dollars (well over a million today).

Source: New York Times Archives (available online)

You should work for Pravda.

 

[bripat9643]

So she had excuses why being on the tit is cool. Awesome

You're too stupid to bother arguing with.

 

[f252863]

She wasn't broke, moron, and she collected SS because the law compelled her to pay for it. I love this libturd theory that only people who support government programs are entitled to their benefits.

Thats not why she collected it, she collected it because she needed it. Paying for it doesnt mean she has to abandon principals and take it.

Wrong. Your simply another lying libturd. And collecting benefits the government forced her to pay for wasn't violating her principles. That's pure libturd propaganda:

Classically Liberal: Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security

I was asked by someone about a new attack on Rand, which some of the rabid haters on the Left were doing, alleging some sort of hypocrisy by Rand for "taking social security." Some childish writer at the rather unreliable AlterNet wrote an article entitled: "Ayn Rand Railed Against Government Benefits, But Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

The article claimed "Rand herself received Social Security payments and Medicare benefits under the name of Ann O'Connor." O'Connor was her married name but her given name was Alice not Ann, but then facts are not important to the smearbund.

The author quotes Michael Ford of the "Center for the Study of the American Dream," saying, "In the end, Miss Rand was a hypocrite but she could never be faulted for failing to act in her own self-interest." (I suggest "own self-interest" is redundant. What other kind of self-interest is there?)

I found this odd since Rand had commented that people who are forced to fund government programs are NOT immoral for taking the benefits for which they paid. For instance, it is not wrong for people to attend government schools, which are funded with their tax monies, whether they like it or not. They have to start with a false premise: that Rand said receiving Social Security, that one is forced to pay for, was wrong. Without that false claim they have no charge of hypocrisy. They pretend she took a position she never took and then accuse her of violating the position she didn't take.

in 1966 Rand's Objectivist Newsletter said that not collecting from programs that one is forced to finance would be wrong. It said:

...the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

The AlterNet smear also claimed that Rand said that the link between smoking and cancer was a hoax. She actually never said that. She said she was not convinced that the case had been made, and at the time it hadn't been fully made. She never said it was a hoax and she stopped smoking instantly when her physician showed her a dark spot on her own lung's x-ray.

According to AlterNet one Evva Joan Pryor, "who had been a social worker in New Yorker" said that "I remember telling her that this was going to be difficult. For me to do my job she had to recognize that there were exceptions to her theory." What job was that? Well, if you believe AlterNet she was "social worker" during this period. The implication being that Rand had to seek out a social worker to help her. Some smear-mongers of Rand have argued with me that she died penniless as the result of the evils of capitalism and that was why she sought out this social worker.

Pryor was NOT a social worker. She worked for the law firm of Ernst, Crane Gitlin & Winick which handled all legal matters for Rand. Nor was Rand penniless or in need. She was penniless when she arrived in America but during this period she had cash reserves of a few hundred thousand dollars and a steady income from book royalties.

Pryor argued with Rand because Ayn did not want Social Security, nor did Rand go out and seek it, or Medicare, even though doing so was entirely consistent with her own ethics. What Pryor said was that she tried to convince Rand to sign up and they argued. Pryor says Rand "was never involved other than to sign the power of attorney. I did the rest." Beyond that Pryor said nothing else. There is no indication whether Pryor used the power of attorney to apply for benefits, or whether Rand knew about it. There is no indication that such benefits were ever used. There is simply no evidence to show Rand "Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

Pryor's full interview in 100 Voices: Oral History of Ayn Rand, indicates the opposite. It shows Rand fighting with her attorneys and telling them that she didn't want to do this. She signed a power of attorney and Pryor said that she acted "whether [Ayn] agreed or not." Pryor never actually says what actions she (Pryor) took in spite of whether Ayn "agreed or not." What we have is the rabid Left jumping to numerous conclusions not warranted by the evidence.

So, there are numerous things wrong with these claims. First, it would not be hypocrisy if Rand did take benefits from programs that she was forced to fund. Second, Rand clearly didn't "grab" any such benefits but fought her own attorneys about doing so and they, not she, were the ones pushing it. Third, there is no indication she actually got any benefits because Pryor doesn't say. And, fourth, Pryor makes it clear that she acted as Rand's attorney on health issues even when Rand didn't agree with her. And fifth, there is no indication that Rand knew all of the decisions that Pryor made on her behalf. Perhaps she did, but perhaps she didn't.

Rand had sufficient resources to cover the health issues she faced. In fact, she had sufficient funds to pay for heart surgery for her brother-in-law from Russia. Rand's estate had a substantial sum of cash at the time of Rand's death indicating that Pryor's concerns that health costs could "bankrupt" Rand never took place. And, since Pryor argued that Rand should have these things in case health care bankrupted her, it is entirely possible that Rand never got a cent. We just don't know. But if she did, there is nothing to attack her over either.

Bripat...

I am an admirer of H.L. Mencken and had the wonderful experience of enlightening an Ivy League liberal (also an admirer) that his beloved Mencken corresponded with Rand and she was a big fan of his.

 

[bripat9643]

." We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." Ayn Rand


its where are going if we do not stop it NOW. WE the people let it happen, only we the people can stop it.

ayn rand died broke and on social security.

as a philosopher, she was an ok novelist.

Died broke?

She died with an estate worth $550,000 in 1982 dollars (well over a million today).

Source: New York Times Archives (available online)

You should work for Pravda.

She also was the author of best selling novel of all time, and it continues to generate revenues for her heirs to this day.

 

[bripat9643]

Thats not why she collected it, she collected it because she needed it. Paying for it doesnt mean she has to abandon principals and take it.

Wrong. Your simply another lying libturd. And collecting benefits the government forced her to pay for wasn't violating her principles. That's pure libturd propaganda:

Classically Liberal: Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security

I was asked by someone about a new attack on Rand, which some of the rabid haters on the Left were doing, alleging some sort of hypocrisy by Rand for "taking social security." Some childish writer at the rather unreliable AlterNet wrote an article entitled: "Ayn Rand Railed Against Government Benefits, But Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

The article claimed "Rand herself received Social Security payments and Medicare benefits under the name of Ann O'Connor." O'Connor was her married name but her given name was Alice not Ann, but then facts are not important to the smearbund.

The author quotes Michael Ford of the "Center for the Study of the American Dream," saying, "In the end, Miss Rand was a hypocrite but she could never be faulted for failing to act in her own self-interest." (I suggest "own self-interest" is redundant. What other kind of self-interest is there?)

I found this odd since Rand had commented that people who are forced to fund government programs are NOT immoral for taking the benefits for which they paid. For instance, it is not wrong for people to attend government schools, which are funded with their tax monies, whether they like it or not. They have to start with a false premise: that Rand said receiving Social Security, that one is forced to pay for, was wrong. Without that false claim they have no charge of hypocrisy. They pretend she took a position she never took and then accuse her of violating the position she didn't take.

in 1966 Rand's Objectivist Newsletter said that not collecting from programs that one is forced to finance would be wrong. It said:

...the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

The AlterNet smear also claimed that Rand said that the link between smoking and cancer was a hoax. She actually never said that. She said she was not convinced that the case had been made, and at the time it hadn't been fully made. She never said it was a hoax and she stopped smoking instantly when her physician showed her a dark spot on her own lung's x-ray.

According to AlterNet one Evva Joan Pryor, "who had been a social worker in New Yorker" said that "I remember telling her that this was going to be difficult. For me to do my job she had to recognize that there were exceptions to her theory." What job was that? Well, if you believe AlterNet she was "social worker" during this period. The implication being that Rand had to seek out a social worker to help her. Some smear-mongers of Rand have argued with me that she died penniless as the result of the evils of capitalism and that was why she sought out this social worker.

Pryor was NOT a social worker. She worked for the law firm of Ernst, Crane Gitlin & Winick which handled all legal matters for Rand. Nor was Rand penniless or in need. She was penniless when she arrived in America but during this period she had cash reserves of a few hundred thousand dollars and a steady income from book royalties.

Pryor argued with Rand because Ayn did not want Social Security, nor did Rand go out and seek it, or Medicare, even though doing so was entirely consistent with her own ethics. What Pryor said was that she tried to convince Rand to sign up and they argued. Pryor says Rand "was never involved other than to sign the power of attorney. I did the rest." Beyond that Pryor said nothing else. There is no indication whether Pryor used the power of attorney to apply for benefits, or whether Rand knew about it. There is no indication that such benefits were ever used. There is simply no evidence to show Rand "Grabbed Social Security and Medicare When She Needed Them."

Pryor's full interview in 100 Voices: Oral History of Ayn Rand, indicates the opposite. It shows Rand fighting with her attorneys and telling them that she didn't want to do this. She signed a power of attorney and Pryor said that she acted "whether [Ayn] agreed or not." Pryor never actually says what actions she (Pryor) took in spite of whether Ayn "agreed or not." What we have is the rabid Left jumping to numerous conclusions not warranted by the evidence.

So, there are numerous things wrong with these claims. First, it would not be hypocrisy if Rand did take benefits from programs that she was forced to fund. Second, Rand clearly didn't "grab" any such benefits but fought her own attorneys about doing so and they, not she, were the ones pushing it. Third, there is no indication she actually got any benefits because Pryor doesn't say. And, fourth, Pryor makes it clear that she acted as Rand's attorney on health issues even when Rand didn't agree with her. And fifth, there is no indication that Rand knew all of the decisions that Pryor made on her behalf. Perhaps she did, but perhaps she didn't.

Rand had sufficient resources to cover the health issues she faced. In fact, she had sufficient funds to pay for heart surgery for her brother-in-law from Russia. Rand's estate had a substantial sum of cash at the time of Rand's death indicating that Pryor's concerns that health costs could "bankrupt" Rand never took place. And, since Pryor argued that Rand should have these things in case health care bankrupted her, it is entirely possible that Rand never got a cent. We just don't know. But if she did, there is nothing to attack her over either.

Bripat...

I am an admirer of H.L. Mencken and had the wonderful experience of enlightening an Ivy League liberal (also an admirer) that his beloved Mencken corresponded with Rand and she was a big fan of his.

I wasn't aware of that. I was led to believe she disliked him because of his cynicism.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Backward thinking people don't make cogent arguments, they just use ad hominems.

The far right is ad hom ville. Thanks!

Translation:

Other people make this mistake, ergo, I should commit to the same error.

Translation: I accept "that backward thinking people" is accurate and not ad hom

 

[f252863]

Wrong. Your simply another lying libturd. And collecting benefits the government forced her to pay for wasn't violating her principles. That's pure libturd propaganda:

Classically Liberal: Lying about Ayn Rand and Social Security

Bripat...

I am an admirer of H.L. Mencken and had the wonderful experience of enlightening an Ivy League liberal (also an admirer) that his beloved Mencken corresponded with Rand and she was a big fan of his.

I wasn't aware of that. I was led to believe she disliked him because of his cynicism.

"The young Ayn Rand regarded Mencken as an inspiration, remarking in 1934 that he was “one whom I admire as the greatest representative of a philosophy to which I want to dedicate my whole life."

 

[f252863]

The far right is ad hom ville. Thanks!

Translation:

Other people make this mistake, ergo, I should commit to the same error.

Translation: I accept "that backward thinking people" is accurate and not ad hom

I guess I have to spell everything out.

I made that comment using your language to illustrate my point. Perhaps I should preface my remarks with a notation. Note: Sarcasm

 

[bripat9643]

Translation:

Other people make this mistake, ergo, I should commit to the same error.

Translation: I accept "that backward thinking people" is accurate and not ad hom

I guess I have to spell everything out.

I made that comment using your language to illustrate my point. Perhaps I should preface my remarks with a notation. Note: Sarcasm

Don't bother wasting your time responding to Fakey with anything substantive. Alzheimer's is rotting his brain. He's barely worth insulting.