Mikee

Grrrrr....

Oh please.. The woman's still in her jammies. For christs' sake give her a cup of coffee so she can wake up. Anyone can see she's crying out for caffeine. Love the hippo slipper.

I will leave you to your ravings.

"Free and open trade" is not possible without this "mucking about" as you call it. You are an idiot. An extremely dense one, the black hole of idiots. Any attempt to shine a light on you reflects only darkness.

The founding fathers from the beginning established diplomatic relations with other countries, made treaties, trade agreements, established allies and recognized the importance of the US governments’ role in diplomacy. They were nothing if not fully aware of the importance of trade and diplomacy. No one ever said it was easy or the process is ever done. The military might of the United States is important to our ability to establish agreements with other nations just like our courts are important to establish the credibility of contracts in normal life. There is nothing about Ron Paul that resembles the founding fathers even remotely in this respect. We have a representative government. I would not like Ron Paul to represent my interests in this world. "Why were we mucking about in the middle east in the first place" you say. "Mucking about"?? Only a true isolationist could refer to the treaties, alliances, trade agreements and commercial enterprises of this great nation as "mucking about". I believe you have made my argument. Edit: Michael, I did not see your post before posting.

sjw, I expected insults and you did not disappoint. I drew my conclusions about Ron Paul more than a decade before I'd heard of Robert Biddinotto et al. You are a true believer and it is pointless to argue with you.

This glorifying of Founding Fathers while ignoring one right under our noses, Ron Paul, is inexcusible. Shayne Shayne, I've followed Ron Paul off and on for years. He doesn't resemble George Washington in the slightest in my opinion. I suppose having a different opinion that yours is "inexcusable" in you eyes. Do you think the "founding fathers" would have done nothing in the face of the twenty years of attacks by the islamists? Say it's "our fault" for not being totally isolationist and having relations with the world? Ron Paul's pacifism earns my contempt. His mix of modern libertarianism and "constitutionalism" and wrapping himself in the mantle of "founding father" impresses me not at all. The United States is still a great hope, it has to continue to exist for there to be a future for freedom. Head in the sand will not work.

I know I haven't been around for awhile, but exactly what is the appeal of Barack Obama? I browsed his website: empty promises, all based on government tax and spend and bureaucratic regulation. Hillary frightens me less.

I was so blown away by this video I had to dig a little deeper: http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/02/15/positi...nt-know-dustin/ "It became the rule of the house: Any treat you want is yours, Dustin, but you’ve got to get it yourself."

"keep in mind our biological limitations".. hmmm.

I thought it was pretty cool too! Thanks Kat. Mike E.

Mr. William Scott Scherk, I'm delighted to wish you a happy 50th! And I thought you were just a kid.... I enjoy you immensely whenever I run across your stuff. Have a great birthday. Cheers, Mike Erickson

Barbara, Very funny! Sounds like the marketing dept is in charge, as usual.

I've just discovered "Cross Fit": http://www.crossfit.com/ Complete workouts, training tips, equipment sources, videos, all on their website. Tons of information. Their philosophy of high intensity, short workouts with full body movements matches my experience and preferences perfectly. I was lucky enough to find an associated gym within fifteen minutes of my house. Bliss.

Michael, I said "I find your misuse of his name contemptible" I did not say I found Jonathan contemptible. As I find Lindsay's misuse of your name, and of you, to be contemptible. But I do not find the totality of the human being that is Lindsay Perigo to be contemptible. Let it go. Unless it's all about getting even.

Jonathan, Regarding your misspelling of Perigo: That is childlike and inappropriate if you want to be taken seriously. Mr. Perigo is easily angered and has little control over what he says when angry and I disagree with much of what he says about the people he doesn't want get along with. But his views about life, philosophy, Ayn Rand, politics, living life to your highest potential, in general, I cannot find fault with. For many months on SoloHQ I was an avid reader of his writings and agreed and sanctioned much of it. There were many lively intelligent and adult discussions, much of it congenial. I'm still disappointed that it all came to an end with the breakup of SoloHQ. The finest moments of SoloHQ were very fine indeed. Linz was part of what made it work for awhile, for that I still have a measure of respect for him. Therefore, I find your misuse of his name contemptible. Oops, should I have discussed that behind your back?

Victor, I finally did understand what you were saying about the definition of Art. And I like the caricature you did of Chris, though how it works is a mystery to me. You are an artist, and a good one. I understand about time constraints, so many things to do, so little time.... Best wishes for health, happiness and prosperity. Mike Erickson

"What's he going to do when he wakes up??? Or in other words, how's he going to get out of that one?" Silly question. You'll notice all the motivation he needs is right in front of him...

Fran, Thanks for this interesting article. I especially liked the "Arguments Worth Having" list. I also like this part about god: "...even more in need of an explanation than the object he is alleged to have created." I always (from about the age of nine) thought the idea of "GOD" was cheat, an attempt to bypass explanation rather than to provide one.

I apologise that I am not a very inspirational writer. Rather the opposite. As I say, it sounds good, but as I am trying to step you through, it doesn't work in practice. Tell me your straightforward definition of morality. >Philosophical problems are, contra Rand, rarely an issue of goodies and baddies (tho sometimes it is). The topic at hand is morality, "Why does man need a code of values". Yes, that means how to judge "good" and "bad" actions. conjecture and refutation I have, as it happens, read much of Karl Popper's writings. You wouldn't be responsible for the bad reputation that Karl Popper has amongst objectivists would you? The general appearance of your posts that I've read is that you are a critic of Ayn Rand the person, her writings, and her philosophy. However, semantical nit pickings do not a falsification make. You have to first understand what she is saying and demonstrate through example that what she has said is false. How does the application of objectivist ethics harm your life? My argument is of course that while Rand writes in a highly inspiring fashion, it turns out her arguments are confused rather enlightened. I think you are confused. No, this is the result of well-known psychological studies. Most people - even highly intelligent ones - struggle with logic. People generally find emotional arguments far more persuasive (In fact I recall a study somewhere that showed logical arguments were the least likely to persuade). I myself consider not very good at logic at all, actually - I remarked on this in an earlier thread - but consider I do have a handle on some of the basic issues in this discussion. Ayn Rand recognized and explained that many people use logic selectively. Thus, the importance of philosophy. You attempting to use a trick, lumping your opponent in a argument with "most people" who are "illogical". I'm not an expert at logic either, but I'm sure that's a fallacy. In fact one of my main overall arguments is that much of the time, Rand is merely playing verbal games, not solving problems. If that's your main overall argument perhaps you should drop philosophy and perhaps write crossword puzzles for the NY Times.

Daniel Barnes, When I read Ayn Rand I felt that her words, her philosophy resonated in me. I felt inspired, I felt that life, the world and my place in it made sense, there were things worth doing, ideas were important and exciting, because of my ability to think and reason and act to produce the things I valued that my life was important. Reading your words I can detect none of that. Rand made the point that without life, there is no need of morality. Rocks don't need moral codes, people do. That is what she meant by "life is the standard". Your refusal to concede that and your continuous efforts at obfuscating the meaning behind Ayn Rands words convince me that your motives are decidedly not noble ones. You try to confuse rather that enlighten. For people, reason in the service of actions that serve to promote the life and values of the reasoning person can be the only source of morality. "Most people are not logical" You obviously have a high opinion of yourself. How are you promoting your own values by playing semantic games?

Victor, This caricature does work. I don't know how but it does capture the pleasant and intelligent fellow that Chris has proven himself to be by his writings. I owe you an apology for my criticisms of your art on another thread. So, I apologize. I've recently found another website, posted by Bob Palin on RoR, with a pertinent article that you may like: http://www.drkenner.com/articles.htm

Mr. Heusdens, Reading your two posts makes me less hopeful that the video I posted a link to will have much of a positive effect. Evidently you've misunderstood or dismissed most of what it had to say. "So, it's all a complot?" The "environmental" movement is political not scientific, yes. "In fact, we are approaching an Ice age." [!!??] God, I can't read anymore.

Marcus Bachler posted this video on another site. I watched it in it's entirety and it is very good. Hopefully it will bring some sense to this hysteria: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=...warming+swindle

Is this one of those instances where the stopped clock is right twice a day?