Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'conservatives'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Objectivist Living Corner Office
    • Purpose of Objectivist Living and Legal Stuff (please read)
    • Announcements
    • Tech Support / IPB Help Desk
    • Links
    • Web Stuff and Other Tech Issues (not OL specific)
  • Objectivist Philosophy
    • About Objectivism
    • 1 - Metaphysics
    • 2 - Epistemology
    • 3 - Ethics
    • 4 - Politics
    • 5 - Aesthetics
  • Objectivist Living
    • Meet and Greet
    • Objectivist Living Room
    • Art Gallery
    • Articles
    • Creative Writing
    • Writing Techniques
    • Persuasion Techniques
    • Psychology
    • Parenting
    • Humor - OL LOLOLOLOL
    • The Library
    • Quotes
    • Romance Room
    • Movies and Entertainment
    • Music
    • News and Interesting Articles
    • Events and Happenings
    • Tips for Everyday Living
    • Inky's Room
    • The Kitchen
    • Science & Mathematics
    • Sports and Recreation
    • Stumping in the Backyard
    • Objectivist Living Room Copy
  • Objectivist Living Den
    • The Objectivist Living Den
    • Offers from OL Members
    • The Culture of Reason Center Corner
    • The Objectivist Living Boutique
  • Corners of Insight
    • Barbara Branden Corner
    • Nathaniel Branden Corner
    • Ed Hudgins Corner
    • David Kelley Corner
    • Chris Sciabarra Corner
    • George H. Smith Corner
    • Corners of Further Insight
    • TAS Corner
    • ARI Corner
  • Outer Limits
    • Rants
    • For The Children...
    • The Horror File Cabinet
    • Conservative News
    • Chewing on Ideas
    • Addiction
    • Objectivism in Dark Places
    • Mideast
    • PARC
    • The Garbage Pile

Calendars

  • Objectivist Living Community Calendar
  • Self-Esteem Every Day

Blogs

  • Kat's Blog
  • wanderlustig
  • Hussein El-Gohary's Blog
  • CLASSical Liberalism
  • Ted Keer' Blog
  • RaviKissoon's Blog
  • hbar24's Blog
  • brucemajors' Blog
  • Ross Barlow's Blog
  • James Heaps-Nelson's Blog
  • Matus1976's Blog
  • X
  • Tee-Jay's Blog
  • Jeff Kremer's Blog
  • Mark Weiss' Blog
  • Etisoppa's Blog
  • Friends and Foes
  • neale's Blog
  • Better Living Thru Blogging!
  • Chris Grieb's Blog
  • Gay TOC
  • Sandra Rice's Blog
  • novus-vir's Blog
  • Neil Parille's Blog
  • Jody Gomez's Blog
  • George Donnelly
  • plnchannel
  • F L Light's Blog
  • Donovan A's Blog
  • Julian's Writings
  • Aspberger's World
  • The Naturalist
  • Broader than Measurement Omission
  • The Melinda's Blog
  • Benevolist Ponderings
  • Shane's Blog
  • On Creative Writing (Chrys Jordan)
  • Think's Blog
  • Kate Herrick's Blog
  • Rich Engle's Blog
  • thelema's Blog
  • cyber bullying
  • Shane's Blog
  • x
  • Mary Lee Harsha's Blog
  • Mary Lee Harsha's Blog
  • George H. Smith's Blog
  • Jim Henderson's Blog
  • Mike Hansen's Blog
  • Bruce's Blogations
  • Prometheus Fire
  • equality72521's Blog
  • Sum Ergo Cogitabo's Blog
  • Robert Bumbalough's Blog
  • Troll reads Atlas
  • dustt's Blog
  • dustt's Blog
  • Closed
  • Tim Hopkins' Blog
  • Objectivism 401
  • PDS' Blog
  • PDS' Blog
  • Rich Engle's Beyond Even Bat Country
  • Negative Meat Popsicle's Blog
  • politics and education
  • J.S. McGowan's Blog
  • Aeternitas
  • Shrinkiatrist
  • AnarchObjectivist
  • Brant Gaede's Blog

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Full Name


Description


Articles


Favorite Music, Artworks, Movies, Shows, etc.

Found 3 results

  1. What is it with conservative talk radio hosts? -- such knuckleheads that they feel compelled to use a conjunction after the word freedom when they say liberty immediately after it, as if "freedom and liberty" were two separate constitutional objects, which neither of them was. The U.S. Constitution was a charter of power, and not a word of it was written by Alexander Hamilton, dipshits. He proposed monarchy and won little support, so he left the convention after a single week of attendance. The other delegates from New York said that they had no authority to discuss a national government, only to perhaps consider amendments to the Articles of Confederation, so they quit the secret Philadelphia assembly, too. Where did you get the idea that the Constitution was an "inspired" work of legal or political thinking? It was the result of an endless, shameless, mean-spirited, selfish division among Large States and Small States and Free States and Slave States who fought each other for two months, refusing to agree on anything, except a monstrous claptrap that no one wanted to sign until Ben Franklin urged that this ugly baby was their only hope of salvation, a cobbled compromise among 13 bankrupt competitors who were taxing each other as if they were 13 foreign countries. The produce of agricultural New Jersey was compared to a keg tapped at both ends, taxed by Pennsylvania and New York. Those few who spoke of equality and liberty were kneecapped. Either slavery remained legal, or there would be no constitution of any kind. We have a Senate because Slave States and Small States demanded it, refusing to yield to democracy or a republic based on population. The Massachusetts crew in were corrupt politicians, angling for power. Elbridge Gerry was the father of "gerry-mandering," arguing that state legislators had to retain the privilege of feathering their own nests. The Rhode Island delegates were imbeciles, determined to block passage of anything. Counting slaves as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of apportioning representation in Congress was pure payola to entice the Slave States to ratify, doubling the number of seats they would hold in the lower house, a permanent lock on Federal legislation. Ending the importation of slaves was fine. They were breeding them like rabbits, didn't need to import any more, provided that the Crown Lands were stripped from Pennsylvania, who claimed the frontier Ohio Valley. Any new frontier states would be created in pairs, a new slave state for each free one. Want to know the truth? -- the damn Constitution was a recipe for Civil War -- all the silly anonymous hoopla by Madison, Hamilton, and Jay notwithstanding. The Anti-Federalists in Massachusetts and New York made equally good arguments, and Patrick Henry of Virginia was foursquare against ratification. No one expected the new Constitution to survive more than a few decades, and Jefferson predicted another revolution in twenty years or so. Don't even get me started on the Bill of Rights, which inverted the notion of enumerated, specific powers, opening the way to Hamilton's doctrine of "implied powers" and a measly rump of "preferred freedoms" that gave FDR a wink and a nod to regulate every aspect of commerce and use of private property. The only rights remaining are affirmative action in hiring and college admissions, NFL tantrums, throwing rocks at cops, ridiculing President Trump, humiliating Kavanaugh, and gay love as sacrosanct free expression. Take a look at your wallet, chump. See what is says on your one dollar bill that used to be worth ten times more in purchasing power? It says Federal Reserve Note, an IOU with absolutely nada backing it. There's your "originalist" freedom and liberty, an explicit Article I power to coin money and determine the value thereof, no different than the power to levy trade tariffs, the Federal government's sole source of revenue at its inception and specific cause of the Civil War, wiping out five years of national income and 600,000 true believers in justice, led by officers and gentlemen who dispossessed and waged war on Indians. Mark Levin a constitutional scholar? Hahahahahaha. p.s. - a new video on The Executive Power
  2. Yes, you read that right. The "Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights" - the Washington voice of ARI, is exhibiting at CPAC2013. This is a complete change for ARI to take in its relationship of Objectivism to conservatism. And just who and what is CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference)? CPAC is a yearly conference started by the American Conservative Union (primarily composed of Young Americans for Freedom - YAF retirees).They attract several thousand conservatives every year with multiple speakers - usually highly prominent nationally known conservatives (examples: Limbaugh, Gingrich, Santorum, Pat Buchanan, Sarah Palin, and in the 1980's even President Ronald Reagan). Many organizations of a conservative bent pay handsomely to have display tables to hand out their literature or attract new followers. However, ACU screens exhibitors - and Birchites, radical libertarians, any type of atheists, are not permitted. Except for a few years when the Atlas Society had a table, Objectivism was not represented at CPAC. Lately, TAS has not displayed (or were not allowed to). Now, certainly, the orthodox Objectivists as personified in Leonard Peikoff and in ARI have never been represented. And never wanted to, until now. For all the reasons given by Rand in her many non-fiction books. She hated Buckleyite/National Review-type conservatives (and with very good reasons). CPAC is the creation and personification of Buckleyites. They run it. In the past, and I'm sure now, many religious-oriented conservatives have had booths and many speakers at CPAC. In fact, the issue of legalized abortion is by far the most represented topic of interest at CPAC. In fact, they are over-represented. Now, we have a problem here. Ayn Rand made her view of religious-oriented conservatives quite clear. And her views on abortion are best represented by her essays in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (see "Of Living Death'). In the past, Leonard would not touch these people with a ten-foot pole. Wanted nothing to do with them. ARI has essays on its web sites condemning conservatism. And yet, now we find ARI (thru its Washington office) participating. Ayn Rand must be revolving in her grave. I'm surprised that Peikoff would allow this. Is he on life-support or something? If he did not know about this, and he finds out, he will need life support. Or somebody will. Wow,...
  3. Scalia said the Devil has gotten "wilier" and convinced people that he and God don't exist. The justice added that he doesn't think that atheists are Satan's minions, but that disbelief in God "certainly favors the devil's desires." -- CNN Belief for October 7, 2013 here. The devil is a real person, he said. The reason that we do not see evil miracles like pigs running off a cliff (Matthew 8) is that the devil is more clever now. (Well, that would follow from the Flynn Effect, of course. God cannot become smarter, but how about the good angels? Are they playing defense behind the devil's power curve?) This guy is supposed to be educated. If Kagin or Sotomayer said some liberal nonsense about global warming, the conservative cheerleaders would be all over them. And surely, if some Supreme Justice of Shariah in Iran said the very same thing, we would have two competing posts here. But some self-styled Objectivists are stone deaf when it comes to their conservative comrades. How will he view your non-Constitutionally guaranteed right to travel or to privacy? (The Ninth and Tenth Amendments never have been strictly constructed to generate new rights not listed previously.) If a state made witchcraft a capital crime - as it says in the Bible: you shall not suffer a witch to live - would he strictly keep the Federal government out of it? And would the "state's rights" conservatives blog in support? And conservative will excuse these as his "personal" views, while fearing that the President is privately a Muslim...