KorbenDallas

A Bad Lip Reading of Hillary Clinton:

LOL he's got small hands too, and he plays Liszt!?!?! (even more laughter) ??? ???

Trump playing Liszt, (laughing again) ???

Crazy cat lady's polygraph consisted of TWO questions only: 1) Is any part of your statement false? -- No. 2) Did you make up any part of your statement? -- No. Done! She passed the polygraph!

I saw that yesterday too, Foxnews had a report about it. This thing is a circus. Currently the left is calling this "disinformation"---when right now everything is unverified and might likely stay that way.

Fake news Carol, FAKE NEWS!!! Just listen to this coda by Maestro Trump... they were laughing WITH him when he sat down to play:

This latest accuser's story smells like bullshit. Sounds to me like Kavanaugh attended some parties and tried to get laid, that's about it.

Kavanaugh appeared on Foxnews with his wife in an exclusive interview, here is a video of it: One thing about all the witnesses that the first accuser has.... none of them recall it happened.

Tony I don't quite understand what you were saying in this last part (in bold), can you expound on this some?

So emotions are a tool for the creation of art, yet those emotions aren't being used for cognition? I'm not really asking a question here, I'm pointing out a contradiction. I don't think you'll find the answer in RM Chapters 1-4. Rand's creative process is reason-led, "tapping into emotions" is a tool that she uses, but fore and aft it is reason.

So emotions are tools of cognition?

Yea it's on page 25 in mine, I have noticed a difference between page numbers on the lexicon and my copy as well.

On page 25 of RM Rand says "the creative process resembles a process of deduction".............................

Just a couple of quick comments, Rand was hung up on formal and final causation, so some of the formulations in the Romantic Manifesto can seem a bit off, and in my opinion they are. Efficient causation as applied to creating art is the action of actually creating the art, yet Rand will want to focus on the final causation instead. Also, due to Rand's reason before emotion primacy, how she says art is created has to involve reason first and can't be emotional first. I don't know how good art is created this way, without letting emotions to lead the artist at times. I like Rand a lot and consider myself an Objectivist, but in my opinion the Romantic Manifesto was the weakest of her non-fiction.

This reminds me of the Electric Dreams episode "Kill All Others" in a way. I live in Florida that has involuntary commitment, it's called the Baker Act here. There are other states with similar laws. The fundament for the law is to have law enforcement and the judicial system intervene when someone is mentally ill to the point that they pose a danger to themselves or others. Sounds like it might be helpful on the surface, but there have been people that have been locked up and drugged against their will without anything wrong with them. Some get locked up and not drugged, and are released after their "eval". I 100% disagree with it and it is unlawful and violates human rights.

sigh... And we're doing the same... Even me... Michael I think they are trying to attack him, Daniels doesn't write anything flattering regarding the Royal Member so they are trying to upset Emperor Trump. Quite a low blow (pun intended).

I think they are just parroting what they are hearing on CNN, MSNBC, and others. Those outlets are saying the economy is good right now. I think Trump will get re-elected based off of the economy improvements...

Aw comon', you know that video was a super-cut to make him appear to be that bad. I'm no fan of Obama, but he's not that bad at his bumbling, "uhms", and stammers.

I really wasn't dismissing anything, my point was when MSK said, "Crony elitist globalists certainly are narcissists" it means All globalists are narcissists. Which they aren't. So when you say All S is not P, that's amphibole and it's ambiguous: logically the statement could mean No globalists are narcissists, or it could mean Some globalists are not narcissists. So by saying All S is not P to try to clarify things, it's actually not clarifying them. I don't agree with this necessarily. Like I said earlier, I don't agree with the idea that all narcissists have low self-esteem or are they in fear. You're saying here that a narcissist and globalist-collectivist has a loss of self, so they become collectivists. But the problem is that many narcissists have a strong sense of self, and don't become collectivists. I know two narcissists that are like this, meaning the Objectivist/NB pathological explanations for them do not fit these two at all. For a principle to be valid, it has to work on all members of the class, and it doesn't. [Some career politicians are narcissists], yes I agree with that. And I agree that politics attract aggressor personalities. But I don't agree that all narcissists need attention and adoration, that comes from Freud and not many psychologists still believe today. Covert narcissism exists, convert narcissists don't need attention or adoration, and in fact they can be quite the loners. I will agree that all narcissists want a measure of control over other people's lives. You're right that in politics there are a higher incidence of narcissists and aggressive personalities. You'll also find this in bureaucracies of any kind---hospitals, government, the red cross, etc---they love the power structure and manipulation possibilities and their ability to "hide" their true personalities. Why do you think Trump was so attracted to government and politics? He is the kind of narcissist that needs attention and adoration, his twitter feed screams narcissism, he lies, manipulates, deceives others, and he makes sacrifices to innocent people---and yet somehow isn't a narcissist? Is he fit to be President because he's a narcissist? I didn't vote for him, but I don't think he should be removed from office. Certainly previous presidents have been narcissists. But Tony, Steve Wolfer said Trump was a narcissist, and I am saying it, and other Objectivish people have said it, so I'm having a hard time understanding how you can think that he isn't a narcissist?

So did MSK and Anthony just form the principle that All globalists are narcissists?... Are they? I mean, what aboot the sociopath globalists, and the psychopath globalists? We don't want to leave those out!

I don't believe in "narcissistic supply" with people with the character defect of being narcissists. Conceptually narcissistic supply will find its roots in either having low self-esteem, or fear, or both. From my experience with narcissists, they don't have low self-esteem nor are they in fear. In my thinking, those explanations are empaths trying to explain narcissists from a fundamental of empathy--but there is a contradiction to try to explain a narcissism in terms of empathy, they don't have it (or much of it). So insofar as narcissism being poorly understood, the best that I have read about it is in the book In Sheep's Clothing. The book doesn't directly cover narcissism, rather it covers aggressive personalities, how they operate, and why. There isn't much in that book that I disagree with. It provides a foundation that explains the roots of aggressive personalities being rooted in aggression---not self-esteem, not fear, nor both of these. Narcissists are selfish---irrationally selfish. They don't mind making sacrifices to others and others to themselves. Rational selfishness wouldn't make these sacrifices, but could still exhibit some of the classic "traits" of narcissism, yet it isn't narcissism, it's rational egoism. Regardless, concerning traits the key to differentiate is the sacrifices they are making, and Trump doesn't mind making a lot of them.

LOL... Michael LOL

Build that wall! And Mexico will pay for it! Wait no, make Americans pay for it! Wait no, we don't need a wall, pay Mexico to deport their own immigrants!

Egads! With Jared as First Mate? Muh Russians v2.0 Seriously though, I don't have a judgment on Ivanka. If she would run for President at some point it would make for an interesting time in history, in my opinion. There have been father/son Presidents, to have a father/daughter dynasty could potentially be great for history. If she wants to build the wall that her father couldn't build, then I'm out