Backlighting

Facing the draft here, back during the Vietnam fiasco, I had 3 options. Succumb to the slave labor that was the Army. Succumb to the slave labor of the Federal Penitentiary. Flee to Canada. I choose the Army, and although I was fortunate enough not to be sent to Nam, lost 2 of the best years of my life.

I like MLP's (Master Limited Partnerships), usually oil and gas pipelines. They pay hefty distributions (dividends) and have favorable tax advantages. It really doesn't matter what the current cost of oil and gas are-it still has to be moved and I see no let-up in demand. Check out PAA, XTEX, APL, MMLP. They are all listed on the N.Y. Exchange. http://www.streetauthority.com/terms/m/mlp.asp

Last night on Inside Edition it was mentioned that Jolie is aboard on the the upcoming film Atlas Shrugged.

At the moment she climaxes she screams her own name!

Sala'am means submission also. Islam is the Religion of Submission. Ba'al Chatzaf Aren't all religions professing "submission"?

I never really liked the movie. For me, Gary Cooper seemed almost robot-like with the dialogue, like he was reading the script from a teleprompter. No emotion. More like a monotone recital of his lines. Perhaps some day it will be re-done, but until then I prefer reading the book.

She appeared three times. I saw one at the time. Many Carson shows were lost when NBC technicians recorded over the tapes. Carson was incensed when he found out. Rand's appearances (1967) were likely lost. I recall a shot of the audience that seemed to show Barbara Branden in the first row. --Brant Anyone have air dates for these appearances? That might help in a search to track down recordings. Bill Barbara "I have a good friend who has tapes of all three of Rand's appearances. I'll ask him if there is some way he can make them available to members of Objectivist Living" Many thanks, that would be awesome. Seeing them would be a first for me, since I was in Japan at the time, serving in the Army (actually FORCED in to the Army via the draft)

I've been searching in vain for any video on-line of Rand's appearances on the show. Surely some video recording exists. I believe she was a guest 3 times. Any info anyone has regarding such would be greatly appreciated.

Your question: "Can someone tell me why the American voter would "tangentially" place this insane Marxist in power?" I believe the looters (Hillary, and the others) and the paracites (those seeking hand-outs) are perfect for each other One can't exist without the other-a symbiotic relationship. It sure is depressing.

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pag...k5qeqm171.app5a The above link is a video of Rand's last public appearance, shortly before her death (The Sanction of the Victims) I couldn't help but notice (sadly) how winded she was throughout the speech, no doubt due to the lung cancer she had. You can clearly see her gasps for air. I was fortunate to hear her speak at the Ford Hall Forum in 1970. The topic was the Anti-Industrial Revolution. I prefer to remember her that way.

I did a google search for "Ayn Rand". There are thousands of entries so I began selecting those I might be interested in. At least 2 or 3 referenced Hillary but I honestly can not remember which ones. I will re-do the search, since I want to see again the video of Rand giving her last talk in Louisiana at the National Committee for Monetary Reform, shortly before her death. I'll post both links when I find them. Selene, here's one listing: http://womenshistory.about.com/od/philosophy/p/ayn_rand.htm

I did a google search for "Ayn Rand". There are a few million entries so I began selecting those I might be interested in. At least 2 or 3 referenced Hillary but I honestly can not remember which ones. I will re-do the search, since I want to see again the video of Rand giving her last talk in Louisiana at the National Committee for Monetary Reform, shortly before her death. I'll post both links when I find them.

I've read on the web that Hillary read Atlas and is an admirer of AR. Considering her socialist ideas I find this quite puzzling. Didn't anything sink in?

RADICALS FOR CAPITALISM A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement. By Brian Doherty. 741 pp. To most Americans, still basking in the successes of the New Deal and victory in World War II, government — that is collective solutions — seemed to be working pretty well at the time. But to Rand and her followers, collectivism was the single greatest problem facing the country. As they saw it, government programs forced citizens to comply with goals they often did not share while stifling the creative energy of individuals and even laying the groundwork for totalitarianism. In Rand’s apartment on East 34th Street, her collective sat around imagining a better, freer world. The movement remained on the political fringe, however, and not only because its adherents were out of step with the times. By any definition, they were also a little odd. As Brian Doherty writes in “Radicals for Capitalism,” his history of libertarianism, every member of the group had to subscribe to a series of cultish premises beginning with “Ayn Rand is the greatest human being who has ever lived.” Rand and her protégé Nathaniel Branden began an affair in 1954, with scheduled liaisons that their spouses were told to tolerate. Rand later described the group, Doherty writes, as the only “fully moral, fully happy” people in human history. In spite of all this, the group left a deep imprint on the culture in the years to come. Rand’s magnum opus, “Atlas Shrugged” — Branden and others read portions of the drafts — became a best seller when it was published in 1957. Its story of a strike leader who is transformed into a charismatic crusader for individual genius became “a cornerstone of the modern libertarian movement,” Doherty writes. One Rand acolyte was a young economist, Alan Greenspan, whose belief in the power of markets — or, in Randian terms, the power of individual decisions — later helped shape the American economy during his two decades as chairman of the Federal Reserve. Another young economist, Martin Anderson, who joined the group in the early 1960s, went on to advise Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan and was instrumental in abolishing one of the most notorious collectivist policies of all, the draft. The story of the American libertarian movement, like the story of its most famous salon, has been a combination of small numbers and big influence. It has never really emerged from the fringe, for the simple reason that most Americans want their government to educate the young and care for the old. But over the last few decades, they have also grown increasingly skeptical of collectivist policies that go beyond the basics. Libertarian thinkers — Rand, Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard and others — have helped foment this skepticism and then enthusiastically pointed to the alternative. Libertarianism has its roots in the writings of a pair of major 20th-century Austrian economists, Ludwig von Mises and F. A. Hayek. Both opposed economic planning and argued that only the forces of supply and demand could allocate re sources fairly and efficiently. If an item becomes scarce, its price will rise, ensuring that people who place the highest value on it — those who can use it most productively — will be able to get it. To this coolly economic argument, Rand and other writers added a moral one: laissez-faire capitalism equaled freedom. This was a tough sell in the wake of the Depression and the war, but the ground began to shift in the 1970s. As the Vietnam War sputtered to a close and the economy stagnated, the wise men who built “big government” began to look ineffectual. In 1980, Ronald Reagan would win the presidency by campaigning on laissez-faire rhetoric. The day after his election, he was photo graphed on an airplane reading The Freeman, the flagship libertarian magazine, while Nancy Reagan rested her head on his shoulder. In the nearly three decades since, libertarian arguments have enjoyed a nice run. Tax rates have been reduced; once-regulated industries have been opened to competition; any two consenting adults, including those of the same sex, can now marry in some places. One of today’s most fashionable political labels, “socially liberal and fiscally conservative,” Doherty shrewdly notes, is “the basic libertarian mix.” Unfortunately, the movement’s steadily increased influence makes up only a small part of the story he tells. Most of the rest deals with minor figures and faction fights. Doherty, a senior editor at Reason magazine, acknowledges he has written “an insider’s history,” but it is also a sloppily written history. In a single chapter, Milton Friedman is described both as an active writer at Stanford University and, accurately, as deceased. And almost everything about “Radicals for Capitalism” is too long: the terms (“Popperian falsificationist”), the sentences that sometimes run more than 100 words, and the book itself, at more than 700 pages. Evidently, its editor also had libertarian tendencies. MOST troubling, Doherty merely catalogs the movement’s failings rather than grappling with them. He relates that Rand “notoriously testified” before the big-brotherly House Un-American Activities Committee in October 1947, when the committee was investigating Hollywood, where Rand had worked as a screenwriter, but the episode receives only two paragraphs. He skates over other questionable matters, too: for instance, that Friedman advised the murderous Pinochet regime in Chile; that Merwin Hart “infected his free-market thought with anti-Semitism”; and that Rothbard supported Strom Thurmond’s segregationist campaign for president in 1948 (because, Doherty casually observes, “he admired Thurmond’s states’ rights position”). The book fails to ask why people who claim to love freedom have so often had a soft spot for those who would deny it to others. Libertarianism has now arrived at an interesting juncture. The moment for its grandest ambitions seems to have passed. President Bush is no longer talking about privatizing Social Security, and his free-market approach to rebuilding Iraq has proven disastrous. The libertarians at the Cato Institute, meanwhile, are struggling to persuade people that global warming — the archetypal free-market failure — is a hoax. Yet in an irony worthy of Rand’s collective, the solution to climate change will probably have a libertarian tinge. The global warming debate is coalescing around a “cap and trade” solution in which energy-efficient companies would be rewarded by the market. In fact, across a range of major issues — energy policy, health care, retirement savings — a hybrid form of laissez-faire capitalism and collectivism seems to be ascendant. The market will be allowed to work its efficient magic, but government will step in to correct the market’s failures. “Libertarian paternalism” is the name two University of Chicago professors, Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler, have devised for one version of this philosophy. Many of the purists who populate “Radicals for Capitalism” would surely hate an idea like libertarian paternalism. But they also might understand that they helped to make it possible. David Leonhardt writes a weekly economics column for The Times.

Lance certainly trained with weights also. He didn't build those quads from bike riding alone. Any body going into their senior years with a history of mostly aerobic (runners) will be weaker than those who trained primarily with weights. "Stronger is alwasys better".

I would have liked the Stones much better if they just did rock instrumentals.

Whether AR enjoyed watching any sports??

A movie could/ should be made with just the John Galt Speech. If I had the money I would print that speech as an ad in the NY Times Sunday edition every month.

I wonder how many banks would be held up if the tellers had hand guns and potential robbers knew it.

It's many years since I first read Atlas Shrugged and subsequently attended one of her lectures. Since then I believe I've read everything AR published She just makes sense. Last week I ordered Atlas on-line and should receive it soon. I'm looking forward to reading, or more specifically, re-discovering it. Much older and hopefully somewhat wiser now, I expect to discover some new gems of enlightenment not previously seen way back when. Hello John Galt, let the journey begin!

For me the choice of a home defense firearm is clear. A 40 or 45 ca. handgun. Both calibers offer a heavy blow, between 800 and 1000 feet per second. Penetration into neighboring areas is minimized. Much better 1 shot stopping power than a 9mm or 38 or 357. Rifles are too cumbersome in close quarter defensive situations and with their high velocity at 2,000+fps, offer the greatest chance of penetration through neighboring structures. Shotguns are lower velocity weapons but like all rifles, still cumbersome, particularly in hallways, up and down steps and in small rooms. Additionally, rifles, because of their weight, necessitate a 2 handed hold for accurate shooting.

Add Arnold Swarzzeneger to the list of "socialists". A couple of nights ago he was on the Charlie Rose show. Among his beliefs is the notion the duty of government is to provide education, stem cell research & health care for all Americans. Makes me want to vomit!

Many people, looking to lose weight, make the mistake of doing cardio only in addition to calorie reduction. This will result in fat loss AND muscle loss as well. Look at those who mainly run or just diet. Hardly any muscle mass. Weight training, done properly and in conjunction with calorie cutting and proper nutrition, not only burns fat but adds muscle, which increases overall strength and well being. Time permitting, cardio excercises can be done after the weight training session or on off days. As we age muscle loss (atrophy) occurs. If you want to slow the atrophy down, keeping lean and retaining strength in your later years, regular weight training is your best insurance.

Judith, Nuts, acocados & olive oil are "good" fats. A small amount, since they are high in calories, are ok to have.Stay away from the trans fats and saturated fats (animal & dairy). As for the specific weight traing excercises, these would be a good start:: All are 3 sets to 10-12 reps with 1 warm-up set (8 reps). The weight should be enough so you cannot do more than 12 reps. Ask a trainer to show you how to properly do these. Day 1: Biceps-Seated dumbell curls, palms up. Seated dumbell curls, palms in. Triceps-Standing rope pull-downs. Skull crushers (lay down on flat bench with barbell). Abs-Crunches. Reverse crunches-both on incline bench. Shoulders-Seated dumbell presses. Seated dumbell lateral raises. Day 2: Back-Seated back extensions. Seated cable pull-downs. Rows. Chest-Bench presses. Flys. Day 3 Legs-Squats. Lunges. Seated leg extensions. Leg curls. Calf raises (seated or standing). Note: if you have the time you can do 20 minutes of cardio AFTER the weghts. If not, do 45 minutes on the off-days. After 8 weeks of the above you can add 1 new excercise to each muscle group. By then you will also have to add more weight to each excercise, since it will become easier to do 12 reps. The diet is at least 50% of the program so watch your total calorie consumption. About 10 calories for each lb. you want to be at. If you want to be at, say, 130 lbs, kepp your calories at approx 1,300. Don't forge to drink plenty of water throughout the day.

Wanting to lose a few pounds I contacted a friend of mine, a former pro body-builder, several montgs ago. For 3 weeks I met him at the gym, almost daily, and followed his training techniques. He split up the weight training in to 3 different sessions per week, hitting most of the muscle groups. 60 second rest between sets and NO REST between excercises. This keeps the heart rate up. His recommended eating plan was mostly lean protein (chicken breast, tuna, turkey, egg whites) and no carbs after 5PM. The only carbs allowed were vegetables and a small am't of fruit early in the day. He also insisted I drink a gal. of water daily (3 qts for women). He also said 1 day per week is to be a "cheat day" . ANYTHING on that day is ok to eat.. I went from a 36 waist with 19% body fat to a 33 waist and 8% in 8 weeks! Amazing!! Not wanting to live on tuna and chicken breast the rest of my life I have modified my diet to include a small am't of junk (tasty) food. I'm not as lean now as I was after the 8 week training but comfortable and happy with a 34 in. waist and 12% body fat. I still do the weights regularly and some aerobics on the off days.