• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Peter

  • Rank
  • Birthday June 27

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Peter Taylor
  • Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.
    "Contact," "Forrest Gump," "Castaway." Doc Martin Rachmaninoff, Fleetwood Mac, Simply Red, TV House, Bones, Person of Interest.
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Contact Methods

  • MSN

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The Chesapeak Bay area

Recent Profile Visitors

14,722 profile views
  1. Ba’al wrote: In a very ill behaved world, how shall our nation survive without a military force, unless you object to the existence of -nations- as such. Nation is in inherently a collectivist concept. end quote Steve responded: In a world where very different ideologies and cultures wield power, there will be nations to separate them with borders. It makes concrete the separation of the different political systems. end quote I listened briefly to a highly agitated Mark Levin yesterday on the radio (he shouted a lot) and Mark thought the best political system ever devised was our combination of freedom, capitalism, and federalism. And by federalism he meant a group of individuals and states, all with their own inclinations and laws, united under a benevolent government designed to protect itself and individual rights. Without government we have the Alan Ladd movie, “Shane:” Collisions of interests and the strongest and most vicious ruling until they are unseated (or shot dead.) As the little boy in the movie crowed after the hero shot the cattle baron, the baron’s brother and a hired gunslinger, “I knew you could do it Shane!” U.S.A.! U.S.A.! Apparently there is evidence that Russia did hack Hillary and the DNC and Wikileaks released the info in time to do the maximum damage to Hillary Ride-um Klingon. I think Putin must have a crush on The Donald. Peter
  2. Was the rain on the parade Mrs. Trump’s mistake? I am sure she will never, ever, let us down and be more careful now . . . and stay on the sunny side of the street Mrs. “T.”!! What the world needs now is love, sweet love. No, not just for some, but for everyone. Note to self: edit later. Peter Melania's Speechwriter Identified; Staying With Campaign by Christine Rousselle Posted: July 20, 2016 12:43 PM: Melania Trump's speechwriter has been identified as in-house staffer Meredith McIver. McIver issued a statement claiming that she did not intend to plagiarize Michelle Obama's speech, and that the copied passages arose from suggestions from Melania that she did not double-check to the original source material. McIver apologized for the "confusion and hysteria" brought on by the speech. She offered her resignation to Donald Trump and the Trump family, but they rejected it. Earlier on Wednesday, Trump tweeted that Melania's speech "got more publicity than any in the history of politics." end quote
  3. So far the Cleveland PD seems to be doing a good job. I like the idea of the police checking carry-ons, purses and backpacks and arresting their asses for concealed weapons and contraband. I am sure Rolling Thunder won't try to enter the convention with fire arms. Could Der Trump-ster win? Here are ten reasons he could, from The National Review, Online. Peter Victor Davis Hanson July 19, 2016 4:00 AM — NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author, most recently, of The Savior Generals. . . . . .The media are outdoing their 2008 liberal prejudices. And yet in John Connally delegate fashion, Clinton’s vast expenditures of $100 million plus have so far earned her only a tiny, if any, lead in most recent polls . . . . So why is the supposedly impossible at least now imaginable? 1. Not a Typical Populist When critics are not slurring Trump as Hitler or Mussolini, they write him off, in sloppy fashion, as a dangerous populist — at worst an hysterical, demagogic Huey Long, at best a quirky Ross Perot: in other words, a flash in the pan who capitalizes on occasional but brief surges of Neanderthal isolationism, protectionism, nativism, xenophobia, and collective insecurity among the lower middle classes. That diagnosis is rehashed groupthink. By any definition, Trump is not a classical populist. His traction derives from opposing unchecked and cynical illegal immigration, not diverse and measured legal immigration. And he is rebelling not so much against a flabby, sclerotic status quo as against a radical, even revolutionary regime of elites who are now well beyond accustomed norms. It is hardly radical to oppose the Confederate doctrine of legal nullification in more than 300 sanctuary cities, or a de facto open border with Mexico, or doubling the national debt in eight years, or ruining the nation’s health-care system with the most radical reconstruction in the history of American health-care policy, or systematically running huge trade deficits with an autocratic China that does not adhere to international norms of free trade and predicates expanding political and military power in the South China Sea on its commercial mercantilism. Trump seemed incendiary in the primaries, but as he is juxtaposed to the official Clinton extremist agenda, he will likely be reinterpreted increasingly as more mainstream — a probability enhanced by his selection of Mike Pence as his running-mate. 2. Obama Nihilism Do not underestimate the volatility of Barack Obama’s popularity. As long as Obama keeps silent and out of the limelight, he nears 50 percent in approval ratings. The moment he returns to the fray (and he always does, as a June bug to a patio light), he instinctively reverts to his natural divisive and polarizing self, as evidenced in his disastrous reactions to the Dallas police shootings, and his politically suicidal post-Dallas courting of Al Sharpton (who used to call on supporters to “off” police) and of the architects of Black Lives Matter. It is likely that Obama, to cement a hard progressive legacy in the next four months, will only double down on his gratuitous pandering, and therefore will see his poll numbers return to the low or mid-40s. That may help Trump seem an antidote rather than an obsequious continuance. 3. Two Sorts of Elitists Both Trump and Clinton are elitists in an anti-elitist year. But elitism is not all the same. The popular furor is not directed at the rich per se, but rather at the perception of cultural snobbishness and hypocrisy among those who romanticize the always-distant poor, as they favor the always-proximate rich, and caricature the despised middle class that lacks the taste of the latter and the appeal of the former. Trump’s in-your-face tastes and brashness are vulgar in the pure Roman sense, and his accent and demeanor are not those of the cultural elite, or even of the dignified Mitt Romney–type moneyed bluestockings. In contrast, Hillary, like Obama, talks down to Americans on how they ought to think, speak, and act. Trump seems to like them just as they are. In turn, middle-class hatred of the elite is not aimed at Trump’s garish marble floors or the narcissistic oversized gold letters plastered over the entrances to his buildings, but rather at the rarified self-righteous. Like it or not, Trump can square the ridiculous circle of a raucous billionaire as man of the people far better than Hillary can handle the contradictions of a Wall Street–created crony multimillionaire pandering to the Sanders socialists. 4. Election Formulas It is not assured that Clinton can replicate Obama’s formula of record-high minority-voter turnout and bloc voting. More importantly, in a few key states Trump may win 25 to 28 percent of the Latino vote and perhaps 10 percent of the black vote, while Clinton might not capture even 35 percent of the so-called white vote. A surprisingly high minority of blacks and Hispanics do not feel Trump is a nativist or xenophobe, given that illegal immigration is often perceived as putting a strain on scarce social services, imperiling already poor schools, and driving down both wages and the availability of entry-level jobs. Trump’s El Jefeism plays well when juxtaposed to Clinton’s suburban namby-pamby falsity or her unhinged demonization of coal miners and gun owners. The numbers of minority voters in key states who quietly vote Trump need not be great, but rather only must top by 2 or 3 percentage points the disastrous McCain and Romney levels of 2008 and 2012, given the likely historic percentage of white voters that Trump may win. Media elites are in denial over this possibility. Racial hyphenation and bloc voting, along with prophecies of continual white irrelevance, should by their reckoning have long ago doomed Trump in the general election. 5. Crimes and Misdemeanors Trump struggles with embarrassing misdemeanors, Clinton with high crimes. She may be delighted at not having been indicted, but FBI Director Comey confirmed to the nation that she was an inveterate liar, paranoid, conspiratorial, and incompetent. That she was not charged only made the FBI seem absurd: offering a damning hooved, horned, pitchforked, and forked-tailed portrait of someone mysteriously not a denizen of Hell. Add in the Clinton Foundation syndicate and the fact that lies are lies and often do not fade so easily, and Hillary in the next 15 weeks may average one “liar” and “crooked” disclosure each week — at a rate that even the Trump tax returns and Trump University cannot keep up with. 6. Four Months until the Election The tumultuous news cycle — Dallas, Paris, Turkey, Baton Rouge — creates anxieties and a general sense that the nation and indeed the world are in chaos — and without any guidance from the White House. Such a vague foreboding that something has to give to avert catastrophe may favor Trump abroad and at home — especially if he can muzzle himself in times of enormous gift-giving from the Clinton campaign. Obama is a lame-duck president who is perceived as weak, vacillating, and ambiguous about his own country’s role in the world — a world that includes Russia, ISIS, China, North Korea, and Iran. The odds are even that at least one of the above in the next few months will feel that it has a rare opportunity to readjust the regional status quo, or at least will have a psychological impetus to try something stupid to humiliate Obama and the U.S. as payback for seven years of his empty sanctimoniousness. Either way, Trump could benefit, given that Hillary is a perceived tool of Obama’s therapeutic foreign policy. Tragically, at home, in the next few months ISIS may re-emerge, and racial relations are not likely to ameliorate, as Hillary straddles a politically correct tiger that she can neither dismount nor safely ride. Self-described leftists are cannibals who always end up devouring their own, given the never-enough trajectory of their equality-of-result creed. 7. Extremism Trump seems extremist in speech, but as the campaign wears on, Hillary may confirm that she is more extremist in fact. It may well be that voters would prefer a brash-talking pragmatist to sober and judicious ideologues. Sloppy talk about temporarily limiting immigration from the Middle East is not so injurious as contrived efforts never to utter the phrase “radical Islam.” Clinton, Obama, and Sanders have moved the Democratic party radically to the left; Trump in some areas has pushed the Republican party to the center. The voter terrified of ISIS, record debt, the spiraling cost of his health care, perceived U.S. decline, and the seemingly violent racial Balkanization of the country — but not terrified of gay marriage or tough trade talks with China — may find Clinton, not Trump, the true radical. 8. Polls If the polls are off a bit in this warped election year, they are more likely to err on Hillary’s side. Republicans who will vote for Hillary or no one rather than Trump will do so in part out of perceived moral principles, and thus they will not be so shy in showcasing their not-in-my-name ethos. But those who see themselves more as pragmatists, who will eventually hold their nose and vote for the embarrassing Trump, are more likely, in Brexit style, to keep quiet about it and stay under the polling radar. I think that to be truly ahead on Election Day Hillary will have to top Trump by 1 or 2 points in the polls — even with traditional Democratic massaging of voter rolls. 9. Converts and Apostates The relative closeness of polling in key swing states already suggests that the Reagan Democrats and other Trump converts may either be more numerous than the Never Trump establishment or at least more numerous outside of coastal, and electorally irrelevant, blue states like California and New York — and thus more significant as swing-state adjudicators. In addition, traditional media, in which Never Trump views are most frequently aired, are themselves growing ossified and do not reach voters to the same degree as outlets like the Drudge Report, Breitbart News, and talk radio. In my rural California community, when I meet pro-Trump welders, farmers, and tractor drivers of all races and backgrounds, I try to ask them just one question: Did you vote for Romney? So far 0 percent of that cohort of probably over 100 Central Valley residents said they had turned out for Romney in 2012. Again, the new Trump voters may not be numerous nationwide, but they may be able to swing one or two purple states. Also, it may be more likely that a Never Trumper will weaken and quietly vote Trump in November as he grows aghast at the weekly Clinton circus. The Trump buffooneries may well be more than matched by Clinton’s ideological insanities. 10. The Screech-Owl Factor For all his lack of discipline, the media-seasoned Trump is still the better and more robust campaigner. His liabilities — bouts of outer-space incoherence, unfamiliarity with basic issues, sloppiness in diction, a personal cruel streak — are balanced by a TV host’s sense of audience, timing, and cadence. Hillary is the far more disciplined politico, but she is not so much uncharismatic as downright off-putting. Even on those rare occasions when she listens to her new voice-coach handlers and speaks quietly and deliberately, she still comes off not as reassuring, much less engaging, but rather as artificially trying her best not to revert to her natural screech-owl elocution. Heartfelt recklessness can sometimes wear better than packaged sobriety. * * * Finally, it is suicidal to descend into the muck to battle Trump. Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz all tried and failed, despite the fact that they had every moral justification in hitting back in like kind. Elizabeth Warren is trying to be an anti-Trump street-fighter; but her incoherent venom suggests that Harvard Law professors should stick to academic jousting in the faculty lounge. Brawlers know the rules of the street far better than establishmentarians. The Senate is not The Apprentice, and politics is not New York real estate. Ask the trash-talking Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg if she came out on top in dueling with Trump — or whether she virtually destroyed a quarter-century’s reputation in minutes and ended up no better than an elderly version of Rosie O’Donnell in a Supreme Court Justice costume. Hillary is stepping up her crude attacks on Trump. But as in the past, such hits are more likely to make the Trump mode suddenly seem normal, and to make Trump a target of those who claim they are more sober and judicious but in extremis prove no more measured than Trump himself. More Donald Trump Donald Trump Will Fail the Heroes Who Endorsed Him Trump’s Weaknesses Are on Full Display in Cleveland A Proposal for Donald Trump: The National Defense We have a long way to go till November 8, and the odds are still with Hillary’s establishment money, influence, power, and media. There will be dozens of Trump meltdowns and gaffes to come and always more slams at “crooked” Hillary. And never count out what narcissists like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama — or Vladimir Putin — might do, or Obama’s Chicago-like warping of the electoral process. Nonetheless, for a variety of reasons, an unlikely Donald Trump has become a liberal’s worst nightmare, not so much for what he says or represents, but because he still could win — and win in a way, along with the Congress and the prospect of a new Supreme Court, that we have not witnessed in 80 years.
  4. I’ve watched some of the convention. I think that Stephen Colbert is a piece of shit. He is a dirty totalitarian. Truthiness? BS. I think Trump has some truth-y opinions. Kasich isn’t coming to the convention or the Bush’s. If he had been invited I bet Dubya’s VP would speak for The Donald. Steve wrote: Actually, when I step back this is a small and silly thing. And, why would someone expect any of these people to not do whatever they think they can get away with? Why would anyone expect honesty from them? END QUOTE That was a pretty good list of people lifting passages from prior works. I save a lot of my stuff and others too and reuse it, so I am constantly doing it . . . but hopefully I don’t plagiarize. It should be big news if Michelle plagiarized a communist. It is time to go on offense against the radical Muslims. What does the suddenly pacifistic Ba’al think of that? This was in my inbox. Trump wants more money, "honey." Peter Governor Mike Pence is a fighter. And that's why I want him to be my Vice President. I know he will fight by my side as we put the American people first and unleash a platform to Make America Great Again! . . . . Mike Pence and I are prepared to fight for the American people who have been betrayed by our government for years. Unlike Crooked Hillary, we will never wait 13 hours to answer a call from our men and women in uniform. We will stand up to crony corruption and government waste. We will re-negotiate trade deals that put America First. We will win the fight against ISIS and never give in to demands of political correctness. And we will keep fighting until we Make America Great Again! . . . . It's Time to Win! Donald J. Trump
  5. Steve wrote: I can now see that Trump had a winning concept for the primaries that had to do with spitting in the face of political correctness and political cowardice and political inaction and doing it by disparaging both parties. end quote Interesting. On Fox I saw a replay of Trump saying “Lying Ted Cruz.” I thought, sheesh, that is bad manners. Somebody linked this before (it seems like years ago) but Ted is going to speak at the convention soon. So I decided to google lying Ted and I came across a video entitled “Cruz lies six times in four minutes,” or something like that. And he did. The “mistruths?” Trump will establish socialized medicine, and he supports Obamacare. Trump is against second amendment rights. He supports Planned Parenthood. (No they should be unfunded.) He calls for neutrality between the Palestinians and Israel. He would keep the Iranian nuclear deal in place . Trump will compromise with Harry Reid on supreme court appointments. I am sure you can find some sound bites of Donald Trump seeming to support those positions or other sound bites that are equivocations. But I would have to agree with Trump that those statements are lies. Or at least exaggerations . . . but I equivocate. My point is that the rhetoric from the primaries should not greatly influence your current support for Trump or Cruz, even if you are still feeling hung over from the political party. Who wrote Melania's speech? I do think they used Michelle Obama's speech in 2008 as a template as to what a first lady should say. Peter
  6. Trump. Pence. Trumppence. It does kind of roll off the tongue. Oy mate. It takes four trumpence to make a pound. This is a big issue. How do you explain to a woman, Pence’s religious/political stand to “force” a pregnant woman to deliver a deformed baby? Many women will not vote for him because of just that one stance. Well, Pence can’t change Roe v. Wade. He would encounter a ton of opposition if he tried any executive actions, from the College of Obgyn and from women in general. And if he secedes Trump, there is no guarantee a Pence Supreme Court nominee would be confirmed if they held authoritarian views. Peter
  7. Some snips about Governor Mike Pence from the Washington Post. He is 57 and on his talk show he said he was Rush Limbaugh on decaf. Pence endorsed Ted Cruz in the primary. He's got ties to the Koch brothers. The billionaire brothers have so far stayed out of the presidential race, a sign they're no fans of Trump. But their 2016 involvement could change with Pence by Trump's side: The resumes of several of Pence's top aides also include stints with the Koch brothers' vast corporate and political networks. Some excerpts from Wikipedia: Michael Richard "Mike" Pence (born June 7, 1959) is an American politician and attorney who is serving as the 50th Governor of Indiana, having taken office in 2013. A member of the Republican Party, he previously represented Indiana's 6th congressional district in the United States House of Representatives from 2001 to 2013 and served as Chairman of the House Republican Conference from 2009 to 2011. Pence is a member of the Tea Party movement. . . . Pence graduated from Columbus North High School in 1977. He earned a B.A. in History from Hanover College in 1981 and a J.D. from the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in 1986. While at Hanover, Pence joined the Phi Gamma Delta fraternity, serving as his chapter's president. After graduating from Hanover, Pence worked as an admissions counselor at the college from 1981 to 1983. After graduating from law school in 1986, Pence worked as an attorney in private practice. He continued to practice law following his second unsuccessful run for Congress. In 1991, he became the president of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation, a self-described free-market think tank and a member of the State Policy Network. Pence left the Indiana Policy Review Foundation in 1994, when he began a career in talk radio. He hosted The Mike Pence Show, which was based in WRCR-FM in Rushville. Pence and his wife Karen Pence, have been married since 1985. They have three children: Michael, Charlotte, and Audrey. Pence is a Christian. During his service in the U.S. House, the Pence family lived in Arlington, Virginia when Congress was in session.
  8. Ba'al? Are you pulling our legs? The Twilight Zone. [Opening narration (season 1)] Narrator: There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone. [Opening narration - season 2] Narrator: You're traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's the signpost up ahead - your next stop, the Twilight Zone! [Opening narration - season 4 & 5] Narrator: You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into the Twilight Zone. [Opening narration - season 7] The bridge is sight and sound both of which require the transport of physical energy from Here to There. Ultimately it is all done with photons.....
  9. America is ready for some comparison shopping. The Republican Convention is in Cleveland from July 18th to July 21st. The Democrats are having their convention from July 25th to July 28th, in Philadelphia . I wonder what the level of violence will be? Well, how is racism after the first black President? Not too good. Things are worse. Blacks expect a handout and special treatment even more so than a decade ago. Welfare, crime, and minimum wage (it keeps young minority kids from working), will continue to devastate black communities. Violent Black criminals and their supporters like Al Sharpton and Black Lives Matter want the police to give them a break as they murder and rob. The KKK has shrunk but we have a resurgence of the Black Power Movement. I have no problem with ethnic clubs but I do have a problem with racist clubs or organizations. Law enforcement MUST use their wits and skills to counter crime and to protect themselves. Cities and towns are currently grouped by choice and the price of living. We will need to unofficially continue to patrol neighborhoods with different policing policies just as an individual does when they choose a path to the corner store. What would the future hold for America after eight years of Hillary? Hillary will spin her solutions to many crisis’s, as she makes things worse. Will we create more walled communities for the protection of decent people from the criminals, in spite of her mealy mouthed hypocrisy? My crystal ball says Blacks would become more militant and separatist, like the Palestinians. So. Trump or Hillary? I wonder how the police departments across America will be voting? Peter Notes. Comedian Dennis Miller on Israel: A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Don't thank me. I'm a giver. Here we go: The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs Who Can't Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death." I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course -- that's where the real fun is -- but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel - or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it -- for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one. Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals. Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding. My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshaling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab State into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death. Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some. After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint. If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a bad id . . . ooh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.) end quote
  10. Ba’al wrote: . . . . We cannot survive alone. We can't even learn to think all by ourselves. If we are not taught language by our care givers in a certain critical interval of time in our youths will we be unable to think properly. The notion of humans as atomic beings is totally at odd with our biological nature. Humans, in order to survive, MUST be social. end quote Deep, random thoughts, but very good. Is atomic the right word? Glow in the dark people wouldn’t last too long. I really enjoyed the movie, “Castaway,” with Tom Hanks. The thought of exile or being on Devil’s Island is horrible too. George H. Smith wrote more deep thoughts about Kant: I think that Rand's emphasis on "evil philosophies" -- which she took to the absurd length of calling Immanuel Kant the most evil man in the history of Western Civilization -- is an excellent case study in the pitfalls of this approach. Was Kant more evil than Hitler or Stalin? Yes, according to Rand's perspective -- but no, according to mine. Even if Kant was wrong about everything he said or advocated (which is far from true), to brand him as more evil than mass murderers is to debase our moral coinage. Well, I've gone and done it now. Let the games begin. end quote Altering history, hmmm? One more quote from George I have always liked. George H. Smith wrote: On a different but related issue -- I had a similar reaction to the fact that Ayn Rand deleted Nathaniel Branden from her dedication in later (post-split) printings of *Atlas Shrugged.* I faced a similar situation with my first book, *Atheism: The Case Against God,* which was dedicated, "To Diane, for the tender moments." By the time the book went to press, however, Diane and I had undergone a bitter split and were barely on speaking terms. Thus, in one of my less-than-tender moments, I considered omitting this dedication altogether, since it seemed so incongruous at the time. But I decided to let it stand, reasoning that the dedication reflected a past relationship and that to delete it would have been to falsify history, in effect. This was the right thing to do, and I have never regretted that decision. end quote George is wise. Peter
  11. Tough. Bellicose. Threatening. Explosive???? Are we talking about sweet Donald or “Napoleon B. Howard Hughes?" It twill be interesting how he greets, meets, and conflicts with the world's leaders. I don't think he will rattle any sabers. Peter
  12. Yada Yada, Badda Bing, Ba’al wrote: Trump is a but fuzzy on law and The Constitution. His main expertise is Let's Make a Deal. end quote Did you mean to say “Butt fuzzy?” or “a bit fuzzy?” To compare Trump’s shows or what he watches on TV to being an expert on a dumb game show is over the top. Yeah, Bob I get the humor of comparing, “Let's Make a Deal” with his book “The Art of the Deal.” Our contract with government, The United States Constitution, does not say the reins are in the hands of the President alone, or in the sole hands of Congress. The Constitution is formulated with checks and balances so that our freedoms are preserved. For instance, the Founding Father’s did not formulate an income tax, but we have one now. The President cannot declare war alone - but even Thomas Jefferson overstepped his *emergency* war powers when he went after the Barbary Pirates. There is no inevitable history set in motion when American politicians err - so we are not rotten to the core. The core just needs to be reinforced. (A Dyson Sphere of law?) Our country exists, as an ideal, as it WAS then, and as it IS now, and that is with what the Constitutionalists and theorists of Limited Objectivist Government must deal. Man’s volition gives him great, but not unlimited, latitude to change his nation's character; if he does, the change becomes a *fact.* There have been decent countries before America and thriving civilizations. There was Greece and Rome, The Magna Charta, the Reformation and Renaissance Europe. And “Rule Britannia.” Americans are a unique group of people. WE KNEW WHAT WE WERE DOING! At its inception we created the most *moral* system of government to have ever existed. Ayn Rand wrote “You have preserved the spirit of those original founding principles and you are their symbol. There were contradictions and omissions in those principles, and there may be in yours - but I am speaking of the essentials.” An Objectivist Government must address the Constitution and rewrite portions of it and add some crucial amendments to it. When we do change the Constitution we must keep one principle as an absolute. Ayn Rand wrote, “There is only one basic principle to which an individual must consent if he wishes to live in a free, civilized society: the principle of renouncing the use of physical force and delegating to the government his right of physical self-defense, for the purpose of an orderly, objective, legally defined enforcement. Or, to put it another way, he must accept *the separation of force and whim* (any whim including his own). Such in essence is the proper purpose of a Government: to make social existence possible to men, by protecting the benefits and combating the evils which men can cause to one another.” So, Bob how are you going to vote? Check out Trump’s web site's position on taxation. The absolute principle of renouncing the initiation of force still requires funding. How will voluntary funding pay for Government functions, general military and police readiness, pay for a military build-up and a war on terrorism? Rand wrote, “The question of how to implement the principle of voluntary government financing – how to determine the best means of applying it in practice – is a very complex one and belongs to the field of the philosophy of law.” Of course Trump is fuzzy on the law and the Constitution. He needs to get his fuzzy butt in gear. And I think he will. Peter
  13. Ba’al wrote: Well the people of the country may be a decent lot (many are) but the government is corrupt and rotten to the core and has been so for over 100 years. end quote Seriously Bob Kolker, you are very mistaken and hyperbolic. I want to bring our country back to its “roots” but without the defect of a lack of rights for minorities and women. And how many who work for, or are elected to governmental positions, want to bring back those specific bad traits of American Government? How many voters? The number is so few it can be rounded off from zero to five percent. Is America great in a strict constructionist, Trumpian or Randian sense? Not yet but we were never Nazi Germany. Instead of being previously duped I would say you are currently self propagandized and SOUR. Walk on the sunny side of the street. From a philosophical standpoint, our founding document was substantially for individual rights and not for foreign wars of entanglement. Peter From Wikipedia: The yellow badge (or yellow patch), also referred to as a Jewish badge (German: Judenstern, lit. Jews' star), was a cloth patch that Jews were ordered to sew on their outer garments to mark them as Jews in public at certain times in certain countries, serving as a badge of shame.
  14. Ba’al wrote: I actually was patriotic and happy to do the work! In short, I was an idolater and I served strange gods. end quote You are sounding as loopy as Greg. While you were working you were using your reason and rationality for a country that has a Constitution designed to protect individual rights. You have been brainwashed by the social justice warriors. If you are an American and you lob an artillery shell or drop munitions on the enemy from a jet you are doing a moral thing. If you are a doctor and a patient dies . . . ? Bob, you should reread AS. Of course, we don't aim for civilians but it happens that some die. Ba’al wrote: Ayn Rand believed all the intelligent and productive people would go on strike and head for Galt's Gulch. Not so. Young techno dweebs (I was one) see primarily the work, the problems and the glory of solving them. Morality is the last thing they have in mind. end quote You are dropping the entire context of your and their decisions (you were in a Free, moral country) and the premise of Doctor Strangelove. The Progressives who made that very funny movie, were mocking and drawing parallels between Nazi Germany and patriotic Americans. That doesn’t hold up to the “Check Your Premises” code of logic. Peter
  15. Carole wrote: Apropos of above, he has also sent fundraising letters to the more conservative of Canadian politicians, of which some are sitting Members of Parliament. (This kind of solicitation from foreigners is illegal here). Now, that is humorous -- or maybe not. end quote I beseech you. Blame Canadia, Princess Khaleesi, not The Donald. Hum not a “Song of Ice and Fire.” Do not unleash your dragons or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. He is innocent of wrongdoing. Spare his life. Welcome back. Peter