Carly Fiorina

[Jonathan]

Defending Carly's work when at HP:

ICYMI: TOM PERKINS, “THE TRUTH ABOUT CARLY”

August 27 by Christy Paavola - Research

"The Truth About Carly"

New York Times

8/27/15

By Tom Perkins

RESPONSE TO:

Andrew Ross Sorkin

August 17, 2015

“Carly Fiorina’s Business Record: Not So Sterling”

The consensus is clear: Carly Fiorina won the first Republican Primary debate. As a result she is climbing the polls and into the top tier of candidates. Her rise has led pundits to speculate about her tenure as CEO of Hewlett-Packard.

I was a member of the HP Board of Directors much of the time Carly was the CEO. I was in the room for many of the decisions she made. I can attest to the strength of Carly’s leadership, the accuracy of her vision and the quality of her management.

Carly was an excellent CEO. She led HP through one of the worst economic times in decades. Less than two years into Carly’s leadership, the dot com bubble went bust. Silicon Valley was in chaos. Companies were shedding jobs almost daily. There were so many layoffs The Associated Press ran weekly announcements regarding layoffs at tech companies. And The San Francisco Chronicle declared 2001 “The Year of the Layoff.”

While other Silicon Valley icons like Sun Microsystems disappeared, Carly’s vision and execution not only helped to save HP but made it a strong, more versatile company that could compete in the changing technology sector.

I was on the Compaq Board during the HP-Compaq merger and remained a member of the new HP Board once the merger was complete. Both companies knew that we needed something dramatic to inject life back into our companies. The merger, while controversial, was unanimously approved by every member of the HP Board and won approval from shareholders. Thanks to Carly’s leadership there was a path forward for this storied but troubled company.

Critics questioned the move, but history proves Carly was right. Post merger, HP became the biggest computer company in the world. It positioned HP to compete in integrated systems and allowed us to compete in sectors beyond the core strength of the company, printers.

Carly was hired at HP because it was struggling. Revenues were down, quarterly earnings were missed, innovation lagged and growth stagnated. HP, once the leader in Silicon Valley, was clinging to the status quo and failing to embrace the new tech era. Silicon Valley companies were prospering by taking advantage of the new technologies; HP was stubbornly clinging to the past. HP needed a change agent and someone who could return the company to its glory days. Carly was the right choice.

The results of Carly’s transformational leadership? HP revenues doubled to more than $80 billion, innovation tripled to 15 patents per day, the growth rate more than quadrupled 6.5 percent and we grew to become the 11th largest company in the country. Carly did what she was brought in to do: turn the company around make it successful again. Not only did she save the company from the dire straits it was in, she laid the foundation for HP’s future growth.

Critics often claim was fired at HP because she was unsuccessful. As a member of the board, I can tell you this is not true. In truth, it was the Board I was a part of that was ineffective and dysfunctional. The HP board of directors included family members of the founders. Carly worked with the hand she was dealt as best as one could. While Carly fought to save the company and the employees within, some board members fought for their own power or advancement. You see, some board members wanted to micro-manage the company, hand picking friends and allies to run divisions. This is no way to run a global company and Carly had the strength of character and courage of conviction to stand up to it and ultimately she lost her job because of it.

While lesser leaders would have accepted offers of transition plans and graceful resignations, Carly would have none of that. Carly demanded to be fired. In order to restore peace to the board I voted to fire her. That was a mistake.

In the months and years after Carly left, the Board of Directors remained dysfunctional. The Board members who plotted Carly’s ouster eventually resigned after an embarrassing investigation by Congress.

I have no question that Carly is a transformational leader who uniquely has both vision and the expertise to implement it. We are in the middle of a heated election, and often facts and the truth get lost in the heat of partisan rhetoric. As someone who worked with and observed Carly first hand I can attest to her abilities, intellect and talent. I am proud to support Carly Fiorina for President of the United States.

Tom Perkins

Tom Perkins is the founder of the California venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

[Mikee]

Defending Carly's work when at HP:

ICYMI: TOM PERKINS, “THE TRUTH ABOUT CARLY”

August 27 by Christy Paavola - Research

"The Truth About Carly"

New York Times

8/27/15

By Tom Perkins

RESPONSE TO:

Andrew Ross Sorkin

August 17, 2015

“Carly Fiorina’s Business Record: Not So Sterling”

The consensus is clear: Carly Fiorina won the first Republican Primary debate. As a result she is climbing the polls and into the top tier of candidates. Her rise has led pundits to speculate about her tenure as CEO of Hewlett-Packard.

I was a member of the HP Board of Directors much of the time Carly was the CEO. I was in the room for many of the decisions she made. I can attest to the strength of Carly’s leadership, the accuracy of her vision and the quality of her management.

Carly was an excellent CEO. She led HP through one of the worst economic times in decades. Less than two years into Carly’s leadership, the dot com bubble went bust. Silicon Valley was in chaos. Companies were shedding jobs almost daily. There were so many layoffs The Associated Press ran weekly announcements regarding layoffs at tech companies. And The San Francisco Chronicle declared 2001 “The Year of the Layoff.”

While other Silicon Valley icons like Sun Microsystems disappeared, Carly’s vision and execution not only helped to save HP but made it a strong, more versatile company that could compete in the changing technology sector.

I was on the Compaq Board during the HP-Compaq merger and remained a member of the new HP Board once the merger was complete. Both companies knew that we needed something dramatic to inject life back into our companies. The merger, while controversial, was unanimously approved by every member of the HP Board and won approval from shareholders. Thanks to Carly’s leadership there was a path forward for this storied but troubled company.

Critics questioned the move, but history proves Carly was right. Post merger, HP became the biggest computer company in the world. It positioned HP to compete in integrated systems and allowed us to compete in sectors beyond the core strength of the company, printers.

Carly was hired at HP because it was struggling. Revenues were down, quarterly earnings were missed, innovation lagged and growth stagnated. HP, once the leader in Silicon Valley, was clinging to the status quo and failing to embrace the new tech era. Silicon Valley companies were prospering by taking advantage of the new technologies; HP was stubbornly clinging to the past. HP needed a change agent and someone who could return the company to its glory days. Carly was the right choice.

The results of Carly’s transformational leadership? HP revenues doubled to more than $80 billion, innovation tripled to 15 patents per day, the growth rate more than quadrupled 6.5 percent and we grew to become the 11th largest company in the country. Carly did what she was brought in to do: turn the company around make it successful again. Not only did she save the company from the dire straits it was in, she laid the foundation for HP’s future growth.

Critics often claim was fired at HP because she was unsuccessful. As a member of the board, I can tell you this is not true. In truth, it was the Board I was a part of that was ineffective and dysfunctional. The HP board of directors included family members of the founders. Carly worked with the hand she was dealt as best as one could. While Carly fought to save the company and the employees within, some board members fought for their own power or advancement. You see, some board members wanted to micro-manage the company, hand picking friends and allies to run divisions. This is no way to run a global company and Carly had the strength of character and courage of conviction to stand up to it and ultimately she lost her job because of it.

While lesser leaders would have accepted offers of transition plans and graceful resignations, Carly would have none of that. Carly demanded to be fired. In order to restore peace to the board I voted to fire her. That was a mistake.

In the months and years after Carly left, the Board of Directors remained dysfunctional. The Board members who plotted Carly’s ouster eventually resigned after an embarrassing investigation by Congress.

I have no question that Carly is a transformational leader who uniquely has both vision and the expertise to implement it. We are in the middle of a heated election, and often facts and the truth get lost in the heat of partisan rhetoric. As someone who worked with and observed Carly first hand I can attest to her abilities, intellect and talent. I am proud to support Carly Fiorina for President of the United States.

Tom Perkins

Tom Perkins is the founder of the California venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

Thanks! Beat me to it.

I like this comment from Bloomberg: "It was the second instance this week of a former fellow executive coming to Fiorina's defense. In a Wednesday op-ed for the conservative Internet site IJReview, Joe Russo, who worked with Fiorina at telecom company Lucent before she joined HP, said recent examinations of her record were mostly "written by someone who has never worked with Carly and has little to no experience actually working for or running a business." Fiorina was "open, honest and inspiring" as well as "just plain cool," Russo added."

Carly has a facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/CarlyFiorina

Excerpts from and links to interviews, plus Donate buttons!

[Brant Gaede]

What Rand deserves is irrelevant. He's not going anywhere with that girly hair. He'd be better off bald. Libertarian credentials aren't enough for the same reason libertarianism has gone nowhere politically: lack of practical if not moral gravitas and the voters don't want radical over conservative for they can't stomach that much change. It's going to be an alpha male or Carly. In the meantime I'm enjoying Trump tearing up the mainstream media, which has had this country by the balls for generations.

--Brant

[Peter]

Macho Brant wrote: He's not going anywhere with that girly hair.
end quote

Mama mia, you wanta he should go a to a hair dresser, straighten his own a hair, or shave a his own head like Mr. Clean?

He may not be the best campaigner but his curly hair is irrelevant unless he puts it in a pony tail. Ideologically he and Ted Cruz are probably the best candidates to fit the Ayn Randian template. And I saw a reference to Rubio in 2011 where he sounded very Randian. Carly can ride my Harley. Trump is all over the boards, dribbling and making an occasional three point shot.
Peter

[Selene]

Mama mia, you wanta he should go a to a hair dresser, straighten his own a hair, or shave a his own head like Mr. Clean?

Peter

No, what I want is for you to stop being an obnoxious anti Italian bigot...

Just my subjective opinion as per Greg's epistemology.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

What Rand deserves is irrelevant. He's not going anywhere with that girly hair. He'd be better off bald.

Brant,

Well, he could take a lesson or two from Donald Trump.

Look at his hair and look where he got to so far.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Macho Brant wrote: He's not going anywhere with that girly hair.

end quote

Mama mia, you wanta he should go a to a hair dresser, straighten his own a hair, or shave a his own head like Mr. Clean?

He may not be the best campaigner but his curly hair is irrelevant unless he puts it in a pony tail. Ideologically he and Ted Cruz are probably the best candidates to fit the Ayn Randian template. And I saw a reference to Rubio in 2011 where he sounded very Randian. Carly can ride my Harley. Trump is all over the boards, dribbling and making an occasional three point shot.

Peter

I don't want him to do anything he's not doing or stop being who he is. He's just not going anywhere in his presidential campaign unless he gets the veep nomination next year. That's possible if somewhat unlikely. His hair is just one facet of this. Such is my opinion about his hair. He's Dan Quayle light regardless. (It's not his hair is curly, but that it looks like it's been teased into a precious perm.)

--Brant

Dan Quayle would have made a decent President if he had succeeded to the office in the sense Ford did, and being that decent--my grandfather hated Ford for trying to impeach his friend Justice Douglas--they couldn't have made it into that office politically via an election

[Peter]

I AM NOT an obnoxious anti Italian bigot, Adam. That was just me practicing scientology dialectics. Me swing on vine and visit ape mama. That was my Tarzan imitation.
Peter

from my inbox.
Breaking News : 2016 Democratic Convention Schedule Leaked
11:15 AM – Free Lunch, "medical" marijuana, and bus ride to the Convention. Forms passed out for Food Stamp enrollment
2:30 PM – Group Voter Registration for Undocumented Immigrants
4:00 PM – Opening Flag Burning Ceremony – sponsored by CNN
4:05 PM – Singing of ”God #$% America “, led by the Righteous Reverend Jeremiah Wright
4:10 PM – Pledge of Allegiance to Comrade Obama.
4:15 PM – Ceremonial "I Hate America" led by Michelle Obama.
4:30 PM – Tips on “How to keep your man trustworthy & true to you while you travel the world” – Hillary Clinton
4:45 PM - “How to have a successful career without ever having a job, and still avoid paying taxes!” – Al Sharpton / Jesse Jackson Seminar
5:30 PM – Hillary Clinton speaks on "Being broke and not being able to pay your mortgages" via Satellite with event attendees given autographed souvenir photographs of Hillary and Chelsea dodging Sniper Fire in Bosnia.
5:45 PM – Tribute to All 57 States – Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
6:00 PM – General vote on praising Baltimore rioters, and on using the term "Alternative Shoppers" instead of "looters"
7:30 PM – The White House "Semantics Committee" meeting to figure out how NOT to acknowledge that Muslims are killing non-Muslims all over the world daily. Followed by general vote on now terming Muslim Terror as "Random Acts of Islamic Exuberance"
9:00 PM – “Liberal Bias in Media – How we can make it work for you” Tutorial – sponsored by CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times
9:15 PM – Tribute Film to the Brave Freedom Fighters still incarcerated at GITMO – Michael Moore
9:45 PM – Personal Finance Seminar - "Businesses Don't Create Jobs" - Hillary Clinton
10:00 PM – Group Denunciation of Bitter Gun Owners and Bible Readers.
10:30 PM – Ceremonial “We Surrender” Waving of the White Flag to Afghanistan, Russia and ISIS.
11:00 PM – Short film, "Setting Up Your Own Illegal Email Server While Serving in A Cabinet Post, and How to Pretend it's No Big Deal", hosted by Hillary Clinton
11:30 PM – "ISIS is not actually Islamic, Despite it's Name" seminar, led by "Sneaky Joe" Biden.
12:00 AM – Official Nomination of Hillary by Bill Maher and Chris “He sends a thrill up my leg” Matthews
12:01 AM – Hillary Accepts Nomination as Lord and Savior while the Celestial Choirs Sings

[Peter]

I see Ted Cruz and the Trumpster might meet at a rally. I bet Trump will think he can win with any VP so we can probably throw out any Karl Rove calculations about who would have the best to specific demographics.

[Selene]

I AM NOT an obnoxious anti Italian bigot, Adam. That was just me practicing scientology dialectics. Me swing on vine and visit ape mama. That was my Tarzan imitation.

Peter

Peter:

If someone asked you, as a courtesy, to refrain from that language, because you are better than that, would you?

A...

[Peter]

Of course. But I may forget some day and do it again.

[Mikee]

...And display all the character and integrity of a toy poodle...

"Of course" meaning promises are easy to make...if you have no plans to keep them. You should try to act like an adult sometimes and not like a little kid running around the neighborhood naked.

[Brant Gaede]

I promise to leave out all sexual references in my future posts--NOT!

--Brant

that covers everything

[Mikee]

Decline of financial independence in America

"

What's the difference between a Socialist Paradise where 95% of the people work for the state or a quasi-state institution, and a supposedly "free market economy" in which 95% of the people work for the state or a cartel-state institution? Given that the vast majority of employees are trapped in their jobs by the threat of losing their healthcare insurance, how much freedom of movement and non-inherited financial independence is available?

This reality is described in Health Care Slavery and Overwork (via Arshad A.)

"

The solution: stay healthy, never see a doctor and you never need heathcare or insurance.

[Peter]

I kept the following quote from a letter from Bill Dwyer. It gives some insight as to why Ayn Rand supported Wendell Willkie too. I have a hunch Ayn might support Carly.
Peter

The January 1944 Reader’s Digest article by Ayn Rand entitled “The Only Path to Tomorrow.” The article is condensed from a project that Rand began in 1943 entitled “The Moral Basis of Individualism,” which she eventually abandoned.

The greatest threat to mankind and civilization is the spread of the totalitarian philosophy. Its best ally is not the devotion of its followers but the confusion of its enemies. To fight it, we must understand it. Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group – whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called “the common good.”

Throughout history no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing “the common good.” Napoleon “served the common good” of France. Hitler is “serving the common good” of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by “altruists” who justify themselves by – the common good. No tyrant has ever lasted long by force of arms alone. Men have been enslaved primarily by spiritual weapons. And the greatest of these is the collectivist doctrine that the supremacy of the state over the individual constitutes the common good. No dictator could rise if men held as a sacred faith the conviction that they have inalienable rights of which they cannot be deprived for any cause whatsoever, by any man whatsoever, neither by evildoer nor supposed benefactor.

This is the basic tenet of individualism, as opposed to collectivism. Individualism holds that man is an independent entity with an inalienable right to the pursuit of his own happiness in a society where men deal with one another as equals. The American system is founded on individualism. If it is to survive, we must understand the principles of individualism and hold them as our standard in any public question, in every issue we face. We must have a positive credo, a clear, consistent faith.

We must learn to reject as total evil the conception that the common good is served by the abolition of individual rights. General happiness cannot be created out of general suffering and self-immolation. The only happy society is one of happy individuals. One cannot have a healthy forest made up of rotten trees.

The power of society must always be limited by the basic, inalienable rights of the individual. The right of liberty means man’s right to individual action, individual initiative and individual property. Without the right to private property no independent action is possible. The right to the pursuit of happiness means man’s right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own, private, personal happiness and to work for its achievement. Each individual is the sole and final judge in this choice. A man’s happiness cannot be prescribed to him by another man or by any number of other men. These rights are the unconditional, personal, private, individual possession of every man, granted to him by the fact of his birth and requiring no other sanction. Such was the conception of the founders of our country, who placed individual rights above any and all collective claims. Society can be only a traffic policeman in the intercourse of men with one another.

From the beginning of history, two antagonists have stood face to face, two opposite types of men: the Active and the Passive. The Active Man is the producer, the creator, the originator, the individualist. His basic need is independence – in order to think and work. He neither needs nor seeks power over other men – nor can he be made to work under any form of compulsion. Every type of good work – from laying bricks to writing a symphony – is done by the Active Man. Degrees of human ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man’s independence and initiative determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man.

The Passive Man is found on every level of society, in mansions and in slums, and his identification mark is his dread of independence. He is a parasite who expects to be taken care of by others, who wishes to be given directives, to obey, to submit, to be regulated, to be told. He welcomes collectivism, which eliminates any chance that he might have to think or act on his own initiative.

When a society is based on the needs of the Passive Man it destroys the Active; but when the Active is destroyed, the passive can no longer be cared for. When a society is based on the needs of the Active Man, he carries the Passive ones along on his energy and raises them as he rises, as the whole society rises. This has been the pattern of all human progress.

Some humanitarians demand a collective state because of their pity for the incompetent or Passive Man. For his sake they wish to harness the Active. But the Active Man cannot function in harness. And once he is destroyed, the destruction of the Passive Man follows automatically. So if pity is the humanitarians’ first consideration, then in the name of pity, if nothing else, they should leave the Active Man free to function, in order to help the Passive. There is no other way to help him in the long run.

The history of mankind is the history of the struggle between the Active Man and the Passive, between the individual and the collective. The countries which have produced the happiest men, the highest standards of living and the greatest cultural advances have been the countries where the power of the collective – of the government, of the state – was limited and the individual was given freedom of independent action. As examples: The rise of Rome, with its conception of law based on a citizen’s rights, over the collectivist barbarism of its time. The rise of England, with a system of government based on the Magna Carta, over collectivist, totalitarian Spain. The rise of the United States to a degree of achievement unequaled in history – by grace of the individual freedom and independence which our Constitution gave each citizen against the collective.

While men are still pondering upon the causes of the rise and fall of civilizations, every page of history cries to us that there is but one source of progress: Individual Man in independent action. Collectivism is the ancient principle of savagery. A savage’s whole existence is ruled by the leaders of the tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

We are now facing a choice: to go forward or to go back. Collectivism is not the “New Order of Tomorrow.” It is the order of a very dark yesterday. But there is a New Order of Tomorrow. It belongs to Individual Man – the only creator of any tomorrows humanity has ever been granted.

* * *
Interestingly, one of the pages of Rand’s article contains a boxed insert with a statement by Wendell Willkie: In the process of winning this war the American people have accepted centralization of government, regimentation of activities and restriction of liberty to a greater extent than ever before in their history. “Totalitarianism has an insidious, a sinister appeal. It appeals to those who prefer leadership to initiative, blueprints to enterprise. It appeals to those who find it difficult to bend democracy to serve their economic or political self-interest. At the end of the war the freedoms we have lost must be re-won and restored, not part, but all of them; not sooner or later, but sooner. If we fail to do that, then history will write it down that in this war – as in many others – the victors were the vanquished.

[Mikee]

Thanks for posting this Peter.

I kept the following quote from a letter from Bill Dwyer. It gives some insight as to why Ayn Rand supported Wendell Willkie too. I have a hunch Ayn might support Carly.
Peter

The January 1944 Reader’s Digest article by Ayn Rand entitled “The Only Path to Tomorrow.” The article is condensed from a project that Rand began in 1943 entitled “The Moral Basis of Individualism,” which she eventually abandoned.

The greatest threat to mankind and civilization is the spread of the totalitarian philosophy. Its best ally is not the devotion of its followers but the confusion of its enemies. To fight it, we must understand it. Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group – whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called “the common good.”

Throughout history no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing “the common good.” Napoleon “served the common good” of France. Hitler is “serving the common good” of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by “altruists” who justify themselves by – the common good. No tyrant has ever lasted long by force of arms alone. Men have been enslaved primarily by spiritual weapons. And the greatest of these is the collectivist doctrine that the supremacy of the state over the individual constitutes the common good. No dictator could rise if men held as a sacred faith the conviction that they have inalienable rights of which they cannot be deprived for any cause whatsoever, by any man whatsoever, neither by evildoer nor supposed benefactor.

This is the basic tenet of individualism, as opposed to collectivism. Individualism holds that man is an independent entity with an inalienable right to the pursuit of his own happiness in a society where men deal with one another as equals. The American system is founded on individualism. If it is to survive, we must understand the principles of individualism and hold them as our standard in any public question, in every issue we face. We must have a positive credo, a clear, consistent faith.

We must learn to reject as total evil the conception that the common good is served by the abolition of individual rights. General happiness cannot be created out of general suffering and self-immolation. The only happy society is one of happy individuals. One cannot have a healthy forest made up of rotten trees.

The power of society must always be limited by the basic, inalienable rights of the individual. The right of liberty means man’s right to individual action, individual initiative and individual property. Without the right to private property no independent action is possible. The right to the pursuit of happiness means man’s right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own, private, personal happiness and to work for its achievement. Each individual is the sole and final judge in this choice. A man’s happiness cannot be prescribed to him by another man or by any number of other men. These rights are the unconditional, personal, private, individual possession of every man, granted to him by the fact of his birth and requiring no other sanction. Such was the conception of the founders of our country, who placed individual rights above any and all collective claims. Society can be only a traffic policeman in the intercourse of men with one another.

From the beginning of history, two antagonists have stood face to face, two opposite types of men: the Active and the Passive. The Active Man is the producer, the creator, the originator, the individualist. His basic need is independence – in order to think and work. He neither needs nor seeks power over other men – nor can he be made to work under any form of compulsion. Every type of good work – from laying bricks to writing a symphony – is done by the Active Man. Degrees of human ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man’s independence and initiative determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man.

The Passive Man is found on every level of society, in mansions and in slums, and his identification mark is his dread of independence. He is a parasite who expects to be taken care of by others, who wishes to be given directives, to obey, to submit, to be regulated, to be told. He welcomes collectivism, which eliminates any chance that he might have to think or act on his own initiative.

When a society is based on the needs of the Passive Man it destroys the Active; but when the Active is destroyed, the passive can no longer be cared for. When a society is based on the needs of the Active Man, he carries the Passive ones along on his energy and raises them as he rises, as the whole society rises. This has been the pattern of all human progress.

Some humanitarians demand a collective state because of their pity for the incompetent or Passive Man. For his sake they wish to harness the Active. But the Active Man cannot function in harness. And once he is destroyed, the destruction of the Passive Man follows automatically. So if pity is the humanitarians’ first consideration, then in the name of pity, if nothing else, they should leave the Active Man free to function, in order to help the Passive. There is no other way to help him in the long run.

The history of mankind is the history of the struggle between the Active Man and the Passive, between the individual and the collective. The countries which have produced the happiest men, the highest standards of living and the greatest cultural advances have been the countries where the power of the collective – of the government, of the state – was limited and the individual was given freedom of independent action. As examples: The rise of Rome, with its conception of law based on a citizen’s rights, over the collectivist barbarism of its time. The rise of England, with a system of government based on the Magna Carta, over collectivist, totalitarian Spain. The rise of the United States to a degree of achievement unequaled in history – by grace of the individual freedom and independence which our Constitution gave each citizen against the collective.

While men are still pondering upon the causes of the rise and fall of civilizations, every page of history cries to us that there is but one source of progress: Individual Man in independent action. Collectivism is the ancient principle of savagery. A savage’s whole existence is ruled by the leaders of the tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

We are now facing a choice: to go forward or to go back. Collectivism is not the “New Order of Tomorrow.” It is the order of a very dark yesterday. But there is a New Order of Tomorrow. It belongs to Individual Man – the only creator of any tomorrows humanity has ever been granted.

* * *
Interestingly, one of the pages of Rand’s article contains a boxed insert with a statement by Wendell Willkie: In the process of winning this war the American people have accepted centralization of government, regimentation of activities and restriction of liberty to a greater extent than ever before in their history. “Totalitarianism has an insidious, a sinister appeal. It appeals to those who prefer leadership to initiative, blueprints to enterprise. It appeals to those who find it difficult to bend democracy to serve their economic or political self-interest. At the end of the war the freedoms we have lost must be re-won and restored, not part, but all of them; not sooner or later, but sooner. If we fail to do that, then history will write it down that in this war – as in many others – the victors were the vanquished.

[Peter]

Thanks Mike.

I really like listing the topics on Town Hall Online, though MSK is not a fan. Here are some of today’s.
Joe Biden: The Great White Dope of the Democrat Party. Blame the Fed for Stock Market Crash by Ron Paul. Another Impossible Thing May Happen: Change in Partisan Alignments. Let’s See More of Hillary Now, to See Less of Her Later by David Limbaugh, brother to the great one, Rush Limbaugh. The Left Sees Only White Evil. Taming the Federal Beast, One Little Cut at a Time. How the Calculator Killed Innovation. Anchors Away. Preparing for the Worst. Team Jeb Hits Back at Trump for Being 'Soft on Crime,' Cites Past Support for Legalizing Drugs by Cortney O’Brien.

And one more, A Revealing Clue, by Thomas Sowell. (Even those of us who are not supporters of either Donald Trump or Jeb Bush can (learn something by comparing how each of these men handled people who tried to disrupt their question-and-answer period after a speech.)

Nothing about Carly, I see the market is erratic again. Home building, down. Tech down. Industrials down. Retailers down. DJ down over 2 percent as of noon September 1, 2015.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I really like listing the topics on Town Hall Online, though MSK is not a fan.

Peter,

Town Hall is a great outlet for their target audience and there are many crossovers with my own values.

Often I agree with what they publish.

When I disagree, though, I usually see it traced back to the same root: the old money, organized-religion-Christian, Chamber-of-Commerce, crony capitalism wing of the Republican party. This reflects their owner, Salem Media Group.

These folks like to preach small constitutional government and low taxes, God's love, patriotism and so on, but once in power, they constantly ramp up guns and butter spending as they expand government power, and they heavily promote senseless wars that kill American youths (not to mention the citizens of other countries). To cover the stench, they like their senseless wars to not be declared by Congress.

Lots of people of this persuasion have businesses that supply the war machine with fat government contracts (no war means no business, but more war means more business). Yes, they are patriots, but I'll let the reader decide on the rest of their motives.

(Two caveats: Democrats are just as thick in non-declared war profiteering. It's covered in a different wrapper, but it's the same crap. Also, some wars are valid and necessary to stop threats. But these are beside my point.)

Let's say I'm not a fan of blood money as a business model, especially when that blood comes from young Americans.

That aside, I'm fine with Town Hall. (Why does that sound odd? )

Michael

[Backlighting]

Brant wrote, re: Rand Paul "He's not going anywhere with that girly hair"

Obviously he likes the Shirley Temple look.

-J

[Mikee]

Carly's in

In other news: Obama might cancel the election

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

CNN changing the rules so Carly can be in the debate is very good news.

Michael

[Peter]

Carly's in? Thanks, Mike and Mike.

Michael SK wrote: That aside, I'm fine with Town Hall.
end quote

Ron Paul was one of the authors. I still like the titles though I also disagree with some of the content. They just have the best titles for their articles.
Daddy Warbucks

[Brant Gaede]

I only read "Little Orphan Annie" for Daddy Warbucks' inevitable re-appearances, not the inevitable disappearances. Didn't care much for her without him. If I recall he had a tendency to swoop in and rescue her. Loved that. That reminds me of my favorite part of Les Miserables--aside from the climatic ending--Jean Valjean comes up behind the abused 8 yo Cosette struggling back to the inn with a bucket of well water and simply picks up the bucket out of her hands and continues with her without saying a word.

--Brant

[Mikee]

Carly Fiorina with Hugh Hewitt interview

Sept 3

"HH: Carly Fiorina, thanks for joining me on short notice and pre-taping this before any of the question set got out there, and agreeing to do so. I appreciate your short availability and come back soon before the Simi Valley debate."

[Mikee]

Yes or No: Is Carly Fiorina Presidential Material?

"She is a person of tremendous courage, character, capacity and conviction. Carly is the one of the brightest, most articulate, candid, well-versed and engaging leaders I have ever known. Period."