However, if you or I believe we will ever convince liberal, socialists of what our Founding Fathers intended this country to be then we are wasting our time.
Their loathing of this nation and what it stands for is well documented.

Let me pose this question to David S: Ayn Rand lived in the Soviet Union until 1929, and then emigrated the United States. Who better to offer a clear perspective on which system of government is best? What I mean to ask is if the best form of government is socialist, collectivist, totalitarian based wouldn’t she have stayed? Wouldn’t that have been a utopia?
The answer is No! She, along with millions came from the darkness seeking that beacon of hope in world…to the United States to seek life, liberty and the persuit of happiness as an individual human being.

Peace out, Dave

P.S. Here’s a Youtube clip of an Ayn Rand interview with Mike Wallace in 1959. She is very prophetic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMTDaVpBPR0&feature=related

S360

I give you credit, David S., for being the most clever Progressive I’ve yet read. Your distortions and lies are subtle and calmly delivered, making you appear quite reasonable.

Thanks for the nicest backhanded compliment I’ve yet received at PJM.

Anyone familiar with Rand’s philosophy knows that this is blatantly not true, as I’m sure you do as well, but you might have made a few others wonder.

I suggest you back it up with evidence and logic, and those others investigate both sides and decide for themselves.

Happy to oblige, Jeff. Here’s a project where There is now an edited version of the United States Constitution being reworked to conform to objectivism

So it isn’t so much myself, as objectivists themselves, who have identified a conflict between their philosophy and our founding document.

Let me know what you decide…

Peace.

DS

Exactly what the left wants.

I give you credit, David S., for being the most clever Progressive I’ve yet read. Your distortions and lies are subtle and calmly delivered, making you appear quite reasonable.

Anyone familiar with Rand’s philosophy knows that this is blatantly not true, as I’m sure you do as well, but you might have made a few others wonder.

I suggest you back it up with evidence and logic, and those others investigate both sides and decide for themselves.

The “procedure,” as it is euphemistically called by pro-abortionists, sometimes results in severe reactions of repulsion from ostensible care-givers, often involves excruciating pain for the pre-born, and virtually always has as its consequence, death, so it’s no wonder that people would rather not think about abortion, especially if they support it.

All of the above observations had to be accompanied by the qualifiers ”sometimes,” “often,” and “virtually always,” because there are limited exceptions.

Some “caregivers,” the nurses, doctors, and others in attendance, aren’t at all repulsed by what they are doing, often on a daily or hourly basis and, in fact, professional abortionists such as those employed by Planned Parenthood of America, feel they are performing a public service, perhaps akin to a dentist extracting an abscessed tooth.

As for pain suffered by the aborted baby, we hear a great deal about spinal cord development and when pain is physically possible although the baby can never weigh in with an opinion.

And, finally, all abortions do not result in the baby’s immediate death since some few manage to survive botched efforts even if they are then left to die unattended and a rare few go on to live full, if often psychologically-damaged, lives.

This distasteful topic of abortion in America has already been the subject of numerous articles on this website and it is not my intent now to reiterate the details of those articles. Any interested reader is referred to the “Search” feature for previous articles. Most websites, even if their owners and readers are adamantly opposed to abortion, tend to avoid the topic for reasons which are beyond me since I believe it remains the single most illustrative domestic issue on America’s plate, an issue which speaks to the demise of America’s soul.

The inspiration for this current piece is none other than the new Obama administration which has already shown it will be, for at least four years, an ardent advocate for the extinction of untold numbers of American pre-born lives. President Obama’s record as a state senator in Illinois, where he twice voted for allowing babies born alive after botched abortions to languish and die, speaks for itself.

So, too, does the platform of the Democratic National Committee speak for itself. The abortion issue plank basically reiterates President Clinton’s professed ideal of making abortion a rarity and endorses pregnancy prevention. That was a sop to those who believe in the right to life of pre-born babies and it had as much substance in fact and execution, or less fact and substance, as the DNC’s 2008 plank will have under Obama.

Another sop was the commitment to embryonic stem cell research in spite of new discoveries that adult stem cells are …

Read the rest of this article at http://genelalor.com/.)

Evolution denier? In 2009?

Surprise. Red state of South Dakota did EXACTLY this in the last two election cycles. In the 2004 election the measure was very restrictive.

It was stomped. Choicers won. Bigtime.

In 2008 the same lifers group floated the same ballot measure excpet this time allowed for rape and life of the mother.

It was stomped. Choicers won again.

In a red state no less.

Might help if you had *any* command of what we call “facts.” Just sayin’.

Rand would agree, wholeheartedly, and there is plenty of “cooperative activism” taking place to try to restore this vision of government by Objectivists, and others.

That’s fine, but trying to run that play in reverse won’t work. Rand may have believed in some of what the Founders taught – but the Founders would not buy into her simplistic views. Their vision, as outlined in the Constitution, is not compatible with the kind of society envisioned by Ayn Rand. Attempts to force a Randian philosophy on the USA are destined to failure, because her philosophy is not compatible with the Constitution.

Peace.

DS