blackhorse

I am predicting a Newt win in South Carolina. His endorsment from Sarah Palin is HUGE. Go NEWT! We will rue the day if Romney is our nominee.

Jeff Flake would make a great VP for Romney.

thnx

True. I remain somewhat positive that Perry will pull out a hat trick in SC. I was right about Santorum in Iowa...

It looks as though Bush III will be the GOP nominee. #&*%!!!!! Oh well, better him than ObaMAO.

I have a Nook and would like to get a sub. to The New Individualist. Is it avail. on the Nook?

Rick Perry......other than Paul, has said and proposed the most radical steps to re-establishing liberty in the United States. Here's my quick mash of the other candidates; Santorum is ok, but a bit of a theocrat------Romney is Bush III (enough said)-----Gingrich has flip flopped like a fish out of water on a plethora of issues-----Paul is a quasi anarcho-isolationist with too much love for the 10th amend.-------Huntsman who?

After a hefty review of all the current GOP candidates (hours on the internet) and their records as elected officials and where they stand on the issues, I Blackhorse, am giving my support to Rick Perry. It looks as though he is gaining a lot of ground since Iowa, thanks in large part to Rush Limbaugh and the voters really going over the leftover candidates with a microscope. Regardless of what one thinks of his drawl as a Texan he is the most qualified GOP candidate for President of the USA. Iexpect him to do very well in NH, and slam dunking in South Carolina. Hear hear!

Peter, I too, would support Bush III if he got the GOP nom, however I am holding out hope that either Perry or Santorum will defeat him. The American public is so afraid of Obama being re-elected that they are too willing to stand behind the most moderate candidate of the GOP field. Ayn Rand knew her stuff.-in order to get men of integrity and substance in office we need a public who values reason and substance. Political decisions based on fear always end up disappointing and running counter to real progress.

As the primaries progress it will be either Perry or Santorum who will end up facing off against Romney the RINO.

Santorum looks to be a spoiler, which I welcome with open arms. Romney is Bush III. Santorum, though he has his PORK record in the Senate, appears to be the most rational and CONSISTENT of all the candidates (not including wRONg Paul). Go Santorum go!

Keep an eye on Santorum...

Peter, IF Romney gets the GOP nom. I will vote for him, but only then. Obama must not be re-elected. If Romney becomes President (assuming he wins the nom. which he may not) then the work of liberty lovers everywhere must go in to overtime, because as Ayn rand new; the threat to freedom comes from the supposed good guys. Romney IMO is still Bush III - but better to be ruled by a fool than an enemy.

Romney will be Bush III. We'll all get just a pittance of our liberty back...a pittance.

Paul's stance on gay marriage and abortion are the LEAST important of his drawbacks. It is his foreign policy and his interpretation of the 10th amendment that are the real problems.

gulch8, I read "The Creature..." and found it a treasure trove of knowledge. Recommended reading for sure. The Fed has got to go. Did Ayn Rand ever have anything to say regarding the Federal Reserve?

Kalispell.

My Dad was his son's 7th grade teacher in Missoula. That would have been...2000-ish? He ran for governor of Montana around that time if my memory serves me correctly. I remember my Dad telling me that the Natalsons taught their kids Latin, which I thought was pretty cool. I am a pharmacy technician. Though I fancy myself a self educated scholar in Objectivism, economics, US History, psychology, humor, and of course chemistry. I call home the Flathead Valley. Beautiful place.

Selene, looks like an informative read....I'll delve into it, thanks. BTW, my parents both met Mr. Natalson.

My understanding, from reading the Federalist and anti-Federalist Papers, is that it was intended as a check on Federal abuse of power akin to the Bill of Rights in that it was meant to keep inviolate the freedom of the citizenry at the level of State if the Federal government overstepped its prescribed powers .In essence, It was meant to keep the Fed from a consolidation of too much centralized power. The problem with it is that it has morphed into something similar to the Confederate States of America, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is a two edged sword. For instance, it allows (at least it should if the original intent of the law is followed) States to have medical marijuana laws, but can also curse people with things like Romneycare. As I have said before, the US Constitution is an amazing document and light years ahead of its time - such a meeting of great minds - however it is not an airtight document and the Founders could not forsee all the abuse and complexity that the future would bring.

As I have stated on OL ad nauseum, my two biggest hang ups with him are his foreign policy and puritanical 10th amendment defense. Yes, the 10th MAY be good IF there is not also tyranny at the State level. The problem with Paul is that he sees Obamacare as wrong and unlawful yet he has no problem with Romneycare, strictly because it is adjudicated at the State rather than the Federal government. Oppression is oppression whether the tyranny comes from one or many, or whether the tyranny comes from the city, county, State, or Federal government. Paul is misunderstanding what the original intent of the 10th amendment was.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/corrupt-maxine-waters-in-line-to-replace-barney-frank-on-committee/ Can somebody please explain to me HOW on earth the racist / socialist "Congressional Black Caucus" is even allowed to exist in the Congress?

They are the biggest minority in Montana, though most of them in NW Montana live in Browning which is a few hours away. Blackhorse is an indian name, though that is not where I get the moniker from.

Gingrich appears to be slipping in the polls. The frustrating part of this whole thing is the lack of genuine candidates who are ardent defenders of liberty and laissez-faire capitalism (other than Paul, even though he supports 10th amendment tyranny, not too mention his insane foreign policy). I like what Gingrich has had to say, but after the Beck interview I have found myself questioning the authenticity of his remarks of the last couple months. Romney is a RINO. Perry is diet Romney. Huntsman who? As of now I am most impressed with Bachmann and Santorum. They may be a little to "religious" for many Objectivists, but that is a non issue for me. It appears that after all of this smoke has settled of late, that Santorum and Bachmann are the two candidates who have a real leg to stand on.-based on their voting record and what they have said, now and in the past, they are the most consistent.

If i had to pick a locale in the USA for Galt's Gulch, based on various economic and other standards, I would choose the Flathead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flathead_County,_Montana