Romney Picks Paul Ryan...

[granfire]

What is interesting is that Romney has received by all accounts (polls and news) no bump from his picking Ryan. That really goes against the norm with VP picks as Palin, Biden, Gore, etc. I believe all gave their running mates a good bump in the polls. So no doubt Romney has shorn up his base but... failed to get independents and people on the fence interested with this VP pick. This race is close but I think he could have made a much wiser choice with this VP pick! This pick may very well have lost him the race.

He might have aimed the ticket at San Francisco...

 

[crushing]

You'd almost think the fix was in. :ultracool:

You have to worry when nobody really wants to be presdient over the next four years, but they have to pretend that they are very interested in being elected.

When the economy was sliding in to the dumps in 2000, I was surprised that Gore and Bush were fighting as hard as they did to win election knowing full well that whoever won was going to inherit a mess.

 

[billc]

What Ryan sees in Ayn Rand...

http://reason.com/archives/2012/08/23/what-liberals-dont-understand-about-ayn

One major misconception is that Rand worshipped the rich and saw moneymaking as life’s highest goal. In fact, most wealthy characters in her novels are pathetic, repulsive, or both: businessmen fattened on shady deals or government perks, society people who fill their empty lives with luxury. (There are also sympathetic poor and working-class characters.)
In The Fountainhead, Rand’s first bestseller (and best novel), the hero, architect Howard Roark, describes “the man whose sole aim is to make money” as a variety of “the second-hander” who lives through others, seeking only to impress with his wealth. Roark himself turns down lucrative jobs rather than sacrifice his artistic integrity, at one point finding himself penniless.
Rand extolled “selfishness,” but not quite in its common meaning. (To some extent, she was using the now-familiar confrontational tactic of turning a slur against a stigmatized group—in this case, true individualists—into a badge of pride.) Roark’s foil, the social-climbing opportunist Peter Keating, gives up both the work and the woman he truly loves for career advancement. Most people, Rand says, would condemn Keating as “selfish”; yet his real problem is lack of self.
To Rand, being “selfish” meant being true to oneself, neither sacrificing one’s own desires nor trampling on others. Likewise, Rand’s stance against altruism was not an assault on compassion so much as a critique of doctrines that subordinate the individual to a collective—state, church, community, or family.

Rand’s ideas apply to the personal as well as the political. One needn’t go to Randian extremes to agree that the valorization of “sacrifice” and the accusation of “selfishness” can be potent weapons for users, manipulators, and family despots—or that dependency is not the path to healthy relationships. (In Rand’s words, “To say ‘I love you,’ one must first know how to say the ‘I.’ &#8221 A common critique is that Rand appeals to adolescents who think they’re self-sufficient, special, and destined for great achievement. Yet surely the world would be poorer—materially and spiritually—without people who carry some of that “spirit of youth,” as Rand called it, into adulthood.

 

[elder999]

What Ryan sees in Ayn Rand...

:lfao:

 

[granfire]

:roflmao:

Seems like they are screwed either way....

 

[billc]

And again...

One major misconception is that Rand worshipped the rich and saw moneymaking as life’s highest goal. In fact, most wealthy characters in her novels are pathetic, repulsive, or both: businessmen fattened on shady deals or government perks, society people who fill their empty lives with luxury. (There are also sympathetic poor and working-class characters.)
In The Fountainhead, Rand’s first bestseller (and best novel), the hero, architect Howard Roark, describes “the man whose sole aim is to make money” as a variety of “the second-hander” who lives through others, seeking only to impress with his wealth. Roark himself turns down lucrative jobs rather than sacrifice his artistic integrity, at one point finding himself penniless.

 

[elder999]

And again...

Since time immemorial and pre-industrial, 'greed' has been the accusation hurled at the rich by the concrete-bound illiterates who were unable to conceive of the source of wealth or of the motivation of those who produce it.-AYN RAND

Economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value; political power is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction. The businessman's tool is values; the bureaucrat's tool is fear-AYN RAND

Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think.AYN RAND

If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose- because it contains all the others- the fact that they were the people who created the phrase "to make money." No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity- to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created-AYN RAND

America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.AYN RAND

.

 

[granfire]

America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.AYN RAND

well, on that one she is pretty dang wrong tho...

 

[elder999]

Meanwhile, in other news:

“I’m very proud of my pro-life record, and I’ve always adopted the idea that, the position that the method of conception doesn’t change the definition of life,” PAUL RYAN

 

[granfire]

Meanwhile, in other news:

I guess he then should adopt all the products of rape s well...

 

[billc]

I always find it a little weird that those here who oppose the death penalty for the worst of the worst mass murderers, like the guy in Norway, who killed over 70 people, should spend the rest of their lives, alive. The baby created by rape, the second victim in any rape that leads to pregnancy, deserves the death penalty. Now that is messed up thinking.

 

[WC_lun]

"America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes.They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.AYN RAND"

This is complete horse apples and ignores much of our own history. It ignores such pitfalls in our nation's moral compass such as slavery, child labor, and company stores to name only a few. It took sacrifice for the public good and government regulation to end vile practices such as these.

As for Ryan's position on no exzemptions for rape or incest, I can respect it. At least they are being consistant with thier beliefs. If abortion is murder then it should not happen in cases of rape or incest. I don't really agree with him, but I can respect the position. What I have absolutely no respect for is these politicians who rely on made up fact, such as it is impossible for rape victims to be impregnated, to sway people to thier line of thinking. Even worse is if they are truly ignorant enough to believe that type of nonsense, then want to pass laws on women's healthcare.

 

[elder999]

I always find it a little weird that those here who oppose the death penalty for the worst of the worst mass murderers, like the guy in Norway, who killed over 70 people, should spend the rest of their lives, alive. The baby created by rape, the second victim in any rape that leads to pregnancy, deserves the death penalty. Now that is messed up thinking.

I always find it really stupid, the logical disconnect that leads some to make ridiculous assumptions....for the record, I neither oppose the death penalty, nor favor it-I do find some of the justifications for the death penalty, including "deserving it," a little absurd. You want to remove the rotten kid from the sandbox because he doesn't play well with others? Fine. You think that's punishing him, or will act as a deterrent to others, well, you're out to lunch on that one-the Brievik case is a perfect example: ig you think for a minute that a death penalty would have kept that hate-filled nutball from perpetrating his madness upon all those poor people, then I have to think that there's clearly something wrong with you.

Likewise, my view on abortion: I oppose it, so I'll never have one, or be party to one. I'd never judge anyone who did-and, I'd never tell a woman who was a victim of rape that she had to carry a child to term.

View attachment
As for how others support their viewpoint on abortion,well, if they're a public figure, it's subject to all manner of criticism......
,......including ridicule:



Frankly, I find the entire notion that this has become a plank of the Republican platform absurd-I do get that there are people who think the "fight" isn't over, and it's worth fighting-and, I think it's pefectly fine that Ryan is against abortion, in keeping with his relgion, but I'm a little suspicious of anyone who thinks they can-and should- impose their religious values on everyone else.....the guy's against abortion, even in cases of rape and incest?

Well, that makes him-and anyone who thinks like him-a booger-eatin' moron, in my book....:lfao:

 

[billc]

It doesn't have to be a religious value, it can just be a human value. The baby is a living human being, and even an atheist can want to protect innocent human life, and want that value extended to the society as a whole. So, religion doesn't have to be the only belief system fighting to protect innocent human life.

 

[billc]

Ayn Rand...

http://www.working-minds.com/money.htm

Francisco's 'Money' Speech
from "Atlas Shrugged"

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Aconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?
"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor – your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?
"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions – and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.
"But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made – before it can be looted or mooched – made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced.
"To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except by the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss – the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery – that you must offer them values, not wounds – that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men's stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best your money can find. And when men live by trade – with reason, not force, as their final arbiter – it is the best product that wins, the best performance, then man of best judgment and highest ability – and the degree of a man's productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?
"But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality – the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.
"Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
"Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth – the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve that mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
"Money is your means of survival. The verdict which you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men's vices or men's stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment's or a penny's worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you'll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?
"Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?
"Or did you say it's the love of money that's the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It's the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money – and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.
"Let me give you a tip on a clue to men's characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

"To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money – and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man's mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being – the self-made man – the American industrialist.
"If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose – because it contains all the others – the fact that they were the people who created the phrase 'to make money'. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity – to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words 'to make money' hold the essence of human morality.
"Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters' continents. Now the looters' credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide – as, I think, he will.
"Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns – or dollars. Take your choice – there is no other – and your time is running out."

 

[elder999]

It doesn't have to be a religious value, it can just be a human value. The baby is a living human being, and even an atheist can want to protect innocent human life, and want that value extended to the society as a whole. So, religion doesn't have to be the only belief system fighting to protect innocent human life.

In his case, it's an absolutely religious, dogmatic value-dogmatic in that it allows no room for it to occur at any time.

More to the point, it's not "a baby," until it's born: this is a scientific and legal fact, and one that has Biblical support. THat it is "a baby" is a also a purely religious, dogmatic viewpoint, unsupported by science. To extend a restriction against abortion towards others based on such viewpoints simply has no place in a democratic republic with freedom of religioun as one of it's bulwarks. Freedom of religion is freedom from religion-as in other people's religion.

 

[ballen0351]

In his case, it's an absolutely religious, dogmatic value-dogmatic in that it allows no room for it to occur at any time.

More to the point, it's not "a baby," until it's born: this is a scientific and legal fact, and one that has Biblical support. THat it is "a baby" is a also a purely religious, dogmatic viewpoint, unsupported by science. .

That's not true there are several states now that if you harm a woman and her unborn baby dies you can be charged with murder or if you kill a pregnant woman your charged with 2 counts of murder.

 

[ballen0351]

I have also been against abortions long before I was ever a religious person. Even when I was 100% against all religion I was still against abortion.

 

[elder999]

That's not true there are several states now that if you harm a woman and her unborn baby dies you can be charged with murder or if you kill a pregnant woman your charged with 2 counts of murder.

Usually if the fetus is killed in the commission of a crime, though.

 

[billc]

Again, it isn't just a religious value, although religion seems to be working harder to save these babies, but putting value on innocent human life.