When Roark returns from a long yacht trip with Wynand, he finds that the Cortlandt design has been changed despite his agreement with Keating. Roark asks Dominique to distract the night watchman and dynamites the building to prevent the subversion of his vision. The entire country condemns Roark, but Wynand finally finds the courage to follow his convictions and orders his newspapers to defend him. The Banner's circulation drops and the workers go on strike, but Wynand keeps printing with Dominique's help. Wynand is eventually faced with the choice of closing the paper or reversing his stance and agreeing to the union demands. He gives in; the newspaper publishes a denunciation of Roark over Wynand's signature.
At the trial, Roark seems doomed, but he rouses the courtroom with a speech about the value of ego and the need to remain true to oneself. The jury finds him not guilty and Roark wins Dominique. Wynand, who has finally grasped the nature of the "power" he thought he held, shuts down the Banner and asks Roark to design one last building for him, a skyscraper - the tallest building in the world - that will testify to the supremacy of man: "Build it as a monument to that spirit which is yours...and could have been mine." Eighteen months later, in the spring of 1940, the Wynand Building is well on its way to completion and Dominique, now Roark's wife, enters the site to meet him atop its steel framework.
Paul Ryan idolizes this author.
Considering that for the past four years the Republican response to their massive ass-whooping in 2008 was to drive this country into ruin so that the current administration would fail, I'm not in the least bit fucking surprised.
+1
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Or how he felt during the Hunt for the Red October?
...I'm just guessing here, but...really, really good? Like, on a sexual level?
Seemingly normal people like that particular novel (I don't, nor the movie, which apparently is nerd heresy). Given that, like some of Clancy's other works, the thing can very easily be interpreted as a love-letter to pro-western politics vs dem nasty red commies without much modification to the source material, I wonder if it's a case of "He would love it so much that he'd come full circle and hate it."
Or maybe it's insufficiently "hurrah USA" techno thriller-ish?
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
0
Options
Captain Ultralow resolution pictures of birdsRegistered Userregular
It's actually not an uncommon trait among American objectivists, I think.
I emphasize that because, in my anecdotal experience, not only are objectivists exceedingly rare outside outside the English-speaking world (probably a good 99% of anyone I could label an objectivist is someone I've met in the United States), I know plenty of atheists (most, really) from outside the US, but none of them were objectivists. It might just be simple math, but really, American atheism as occasionally been framed alongside objectivism more than a few times.
No people I know who are objectivsts are deeply religious either, or even self-identified spiritual types. Take of that what you will.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
What chucklefucks inject into the novel =/= what the novel is actually talking about.
Rand's writings have nothing to do with Christianity, so the Fucking Christian establishment has nothing to do with the plot of the book. It's about being a selfish dick. Nothing more, nothing less.
+1
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
What chucklefucks inject into the novel =/= what the novel is actually talking about.
Rand's writings have nothing to do with Christianity, so the Fucking Christian establishment has nothing to do with the plot of the book. It's about being a selfish dick. Nothing more, nothing less.
Not having read the book I wouldn't know but having the hero build the largest tower ever in pure narcassistic revelry sounds p. babelish.
My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
What chucklefucks inject into the novel =/= what the novel is actually talking about.
Rand's writings have nothing to do with Christianity, so the Fucking Christian establishment has nothing to do with the plot of the book. It's about being a selfish dick. Nothing more, nothing less.
Not having read the book I wouldn't know but having the hero build the largest tower ever in pure narcassistic revelry sounds p. babelish.
Well without a doubt it's enthusiastically narcissistic, but the only reason it had shades of Babel is because Babel is the zeitgeist.
It still has nothing to do with christian fundamentalism.
0
Options
JohnnyCacheStarting DefensePlace at the tableRegistered Userregular
This is a real thing. A company with a few years of history is occasionally useful. There are businesses that do nothing but register companies and maintain them, then sell them for a markup. It's not necessarily even a "condom" for dirty business...it helps you get listed on the stock exchanges, IIRC, and there are some other upsides to an older company.
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
How 'bout we jump off this painfully retarded tangent about how Ayn Rand did/didn't load her works with fundamentalist Christian ideas and get back to talking about things that actually matter, like how Paul Ryan is in no fucking way, shape, or form a fiscal conservative.
+1
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
How 'bout we jump off this painfully retarded tangent about how Ayn Rand did/didn't load her works with fundamentalist Christian ideas and get back to talking about things that actually matter, like how Paul Ryan is in no fucking way, shape, or form a fiscal conservative.
He is unless his constituents will vote against him for it
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I've been under attack from... people in my area and various family and friends regarding the election. Obama being Hitler and me being a Nazi supporter has come up so much now... I think am retarded. Like, I got an overdose of retardation. I don't even try and argue anymore, I just link this guy:
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
The whole Rand tangent is pointless; you don't bother examining somebody's ideological influences unless you're trying to determine the policies they plan on implementing. We already know what policy Ryan wants: his shitty budget plan.
The whole Rand tangent is pointless; you don't bother examining somebody's ideological influences unless you're trying to determine the policies they plan on implementing. We already know what policy Ryan wants: his shitty budget plan.
I'm pretty much in awe that he and Mitt Romney have no real answers regarding their "plan." I mean, can you really run for President on the platform of "I will tell you when I am in office?"
I'm also not familiar with the donation systems and contribution legalities. Is every donation sent to a campaign tracked? If someone decides to spend X, where does the other remaining Y end up at the end of the election? Can you just run for office, take the money and bail?
So the hero of this tale literally builds a tower of babel? How the. Who the. Fucking Christian establishment how are you not understanding your own goddamn hubris here ???
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
What chucklefucks inject into the novel =/= what the novel is actually talking about.
Rand's writings have nothing to do with Christianity, so the Fucking Christian establishment has nothing to do with the plot of the book. It's about being a selfish dick. Nothing more, nothing less.
But both of their followers mindlessly repeat talking points from them, that may or may not actually be in the books, without really reading their holy texts
The whole Rand tangent is pointless; you don't bother examining somebody's ideological influences unless you're trying to determine the policies they plan on implementing. We already know what policy Ryan wants: his shitty budget plan.
I'm pretty much in awe that he and Mitt Romney have no real answers regarding their "plan." I mean, can you really run for President on the platform of "I will tell you when I am in office?"
I'm also not familiar with the donation systems and contribution legalities. Is every donation sent to a campaign tracked? If someone decides to spend X, where does the other remaining Y end up at the end of the election? Can you just run for office, take the money and bail?
McCain tried that on some issues in 2008. Didn't work out too well for him.
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
I mean you can talk about why Atlas Shrugged or any of the rest of her writing is terrible. Because, even without considering the crazypants ideology, it is objectively terrible.
But that's kind of a bad hole to go down because anybody who understands that critique either 1) doesn't know who Ayn Rand is and doesn't care, 2) already thinks Rand is dumb and doesn't care, or 3) thinks Rand is awesome and secretly wishes Ryan would give up on all this religion stuff and embrace objectivism wholeheartedly.
The threes are unreachable, and neither the ones or the twos care about a critique of Rand. It might be worth talking about if Ryan hadn't, you know, codified how nutso he is in this whole budget thing.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
0
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Hah!
I caught up.
And the only thing I can really think of to comment on is
Who in the world, you know, in the world, thinks that Paul Ryan is attractive? This has been bothering me since he was picked. I do not understand this. I just simply do not.
when the group you're being compared to is 'politicians,' all that's really required to be considered attractive is a full head of hair and a relatively clear complexion. Not much there in the way of competition.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Paul Ryan's thing about "the welfare state lulling able-bodied people into lives of complacency" is a fucking dream. In Paul Ryan's mind, everyone has the potential to be a Titan of Industry, if only the government wasn't offering them a life of luxury for nothing.
You know, luxuries like food for their kids, affordable healthcare, etc.
This is just a high-powered version of the welfare queen argument.
Who in the world, you know, in the world, thinks that Paul Ryan is attractive? This has been bothering me since he was picked. I do not understand this. I just simply do not.
He might be handsome if his eyes weren't so cold and detached. His gaze is pretty weird and unsettling. Also: his body might be attractive (apparently he works out a ton?) if he were to buy shirts and suits that actually fit him.
I was only ever introduced to Ayn Rand's philosophies a couple years ago. Never heard of her when I was in school, and nobody I know read Atlas Shrugged. I'd hear her mentioned a couple of times in the context of "you agree with Ayn Rand lololol", but never really dug deeper than that.
I don't think it was until somewhere around 2009 when I actually looked at what she believed in, and I can say that I can think of several people who would treat her philosophies as super mega awesome gospel. Weird coincidence, they are all assholes, and some of them jobless.
Had a fun talk with my family today. My dad insists that over 50% of the voting population are racists who accidentally voted for Obama the first time around because he works at Lowe's part time and, I quote, "every day there's at least 1 person in the store who says they want to get the n****r out of office." I tried to explain how statistics works and the fact that 1 person out of EVERYBODY IN THE STORE isn't significant, but then he pulls some number out of his ass (today's factoid, "hate groups are up 68%") and starts raving about Ancient Aliens again.
when the group you're being compared to is 'politicians,' all that's really required to be considered attractive is a full head of hair and a relatively clear complexion. Not much there in the way of competition.
Height matters, too. Since 1912, 19 of the 25 winners of the presidential election (a solid 76%) have been as tall or taller than their opponent.
The Romney campaign has a new strategy: paint President Obama as a worn-out politician running a dirty campaign. Obama’s campaign isn’t just nasty, Romney says. It’s the nastiest.
This new tactic was on full display Tuesday night in Chillicothe, Ohio, where Mitt Romney summoned some strong words about the president.
“[H]e’s intellectually exhausted, out of ideas, and out of energy,” Romney said, according to prepared remarks. “And so his campaign has resorted to diversions and distractions, to demagoguing and defaming others. This is an old game in politics; what’s different this year is that the president is taking things to a new low.”
The proof? Romney accused Obama and his surrogates of unleashing “reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the presidency.” On Tuesday, the Romney campaign released an ad in Iowa holding Obama accountable for a super PAC ad that connects Mitt Romney with a woman’s death.
On Tuesday, according to the Romney, the Obama campaign hit a “new low” when Vice President Joe Biden used the word “chains” in front of a largely black audience in Virginia, purportedly injecting racial “code words” into his campaign.
“Another outrageous charge came a few hours ago in Virginia,” Romney said. “And the White House sinks a little bit lower. This is what an angry and desperate Presidency looks like.”
Early on in the campaign, President Obama’s personal likability among voters shielded him from these more personal kinds of attacks. But recently, the Romney campaign has decided they need to up the attacks on the president and has seen openings, such as the infamous Priorities USA ad, to get personal. Since adding Paul Ryan to the ticket, the Romney campaign has also sought to build off of Ryan’s reputation as a serious politician who cares about the issues.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
Despite Romney’s indignation, his campaign is currently attacking Obama in two new ads over Medicare and Welfare, both of which are demonstrably false.
The Obama campaign called Romney’s comments “unhinged” in a terse response from press secretary Ben LaBolt.
“Governor Romney’s comments tonight seemed unhinged, and particularly strange coming at a time when he’s pouring tens of millions of dollars into negative ads that are demonstrably false.”
The Romney campaign has a new strategy: paint President Obama as a worn-out politician running a dirty campaign. Obama’s campaign isn’t just nasty, Romney says. It’s the nastiest.
This new tactic was on full display Tuesday night in Chillicothe, Ohio, where Mitt Romney summoned some strong words about the president.
“[H]e’s intellectually exhausted, out of ideas, and out of energy,” Romney said, according to prepared remarks. “And so his campaign has resorted to diversions and distractions, to demagoguing and defaming others. This is an old game in politics; what’s different this year is that the president is taking things to a new low.”
The proof? Romney accused Obama and his surrogates of unleashing “reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the presidency.” On Tuesday, the Romney campaign released an ad in Iowa holding Obama accountable for a super PAC ad that connects Mitt Romney with a woman’s death.
On Tuesday, according to the Romney, the Obama campaign hit a “new low” when Vice President Joe Biden used the word “chains” in front of a largely black audience in Virginia, purportedly injecting racial “code words” into his campaign.
“Another outrageous charge came a few hours ago in Virginia,” Romney said. “And the White House sinks a little bit lower. This is what an angry and desperate Presidency looks like.”
Early on in the campaign, President Obama’s personal likability among voters shielded him from these more personal kinds of attacks. But recently, the Romney campaign has decided they need to up the attacks on the president and has seen openings, such as the infamous Priorities USA ad, to get personal. Since adding Paul Ryan to the ticket, the Romney campaign has also sought to build off of Ryan’s reputation as a serious politician who cares about the issues.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
Despite Romney’s indignation, his campaign is currently attacking Obama in two new ads over Medicare and Welfare, both of which are demonstrably false.
The Obama campaign called Romney’s comments “unhinged” in a terse response from press secretary Ben LaBolt.
“Governor Romney’s comments tonight seemed unhinged, and particularly strange coming at a time when he’s pouring tens of millions of dollars into negative ads that are demonstrably false.”
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
I love that "go back to Chicago" line. Because it's Romney: you know if he keeps saying it, sooner or later he's going to fuck up and say "go back to Africa" instead. And that day will be delicious.
I continue to insist that Ayn Rand was one of the worst people of the 20th century. Which is an impressive group.
In her defense, a lot of the bullshit in her books can probably be traced to her drug habit. Quite a few batshit insane authors around the same time mixed high dose inhaled Benzedrine with tobacco, it was sort of an expensive alternative to being an alcoholic that didn't come with free advertising in the form of bar brawls in the police blotter. Remember she is somebody who prided herself in going four days without sleep to finish the Fountainhead in time to print. Most people who go that long without sleep start arguing with house plants.
Which is of course one of the better reasons to ignore her, too: These are very much the ravings of an amphetamine addict. She might not be screaming about the ghosts in her teeth, since even overdosing on bennies isn't as bad as meth, but it's still enough to really fuck you up mentally.
Even CNN is calling this shit out
I think Paul Ryan might finally be the tipping point where the media decides a bloodbath will make just as fine viewing as the match going to points.
Paul Ryan has articulated his own crazy beliefs frequently and thoroughly enough that I don't see any particular need to try and tie him to Rand, even if it's pretty obvious he's a fan.
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
Or look up the plot on wikipedia. There's also a thread on Atlas Shrugged in the archives, too.
The Romney campaign has a new strategy: paint President Obama as a worn-out politician running a dirty campaign. Obama’s campaign isn’t just nasty, Romney says. It’s the nastiest.
This new tactic was on full display Tuesday night in Chillicothe, Ohio, where Mitt Romney summoned some strong words about the president.
“[H]e’s intellectually exhausted, out of ideas, and out of energy,” Romney said, according to prepared remarks. “And so his campaign has resorted to diversions and distractions, to demagoguing and defaming others. This is an old game in politics; what’s different this year is that the president is taking things to a new low.”
The proof? Romney accused Obama and his surrogates of unleashing “reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the presidency.” On Tuesday, the Romney campaign released an ad in Iowa holding Obama accountable for a super PAC ad that connects Mitt Romney with a woman’s death.
On Tuesday, according to the Romney, the Obama campaign hit a “new low” when Vice President Joe Biden used the word “chains” in front of a largely black audience in Virginia, purportedly injecting racial “code words” into his campaign.
“Another outrageous charge came a few hours ago in Virginia,” Romney said. “And the White House sinks a little bit lower. This is what an angry and desperate Presidency looks like.”
Early on in the campaign, President Obama’s personal likability among voters shielded him from these more personal kinds of attacks. But recently, the Romney campaign has decided they need to up the attacks on the president and has seen openings, such as the infamous Priorities USA ad, to get personal. Since adding Paul Ryan to the ticket, the Romney campaign has also sought to build off of Ryan’s reputation as a serious politician who cares about the issues.
“So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America,” Romney said.
Despite Romney’s indignation, his campaign is currently attacking Obama in two new ads over Medicare and Welfare, both of which are demonstrably false.
The Obama campaign called Romney’s comments “unhinged” in a terse response from press secretary Ben LaBolt.
“Governor Romney’s comments tonight seemed unhinged, and particularly strange coming at a time when he’s pouring tens of millions of dollars into negative ads that are demonstrably false.”
Burn.
The projection the Romney campaign is doing is breath-taking. It will be glorious to see Obama kick his ass in the election.
Posts
Considering that for the past four years the Republican response to their massive ass-whooping in 2008 was to drive this country into ruin so that the current administration would fail, I'm not in the least bit fucking surprised.
Also, Peter Keating added that sink specifically to fuck with Howard, so... yeah.
...I'm just guessing here, but...really, really good? Like, on a sexual level?
Seemingly normal people like that particular novel (I don't, nor the movie, which apparently is nerd heresy). Given that, like some of Clancy's other works, the thing can very easily be interpreted as a love-letter to pro-western politics vs dem nasty red commies without much modification to the source material, I wonder if it's a case of "He would love it so much that he'd come full circle and hate it."
Or maybe it's insufficiently "hurrah USA" techno thriller-ish?
Ayn Rand was an athesit, duder.
I emphasize that because, in my anecdotal experience, not only are objectivists exceedingly rare outside outside the English-speaking world (probably a good 99% of anyone I could label an objectivist is someone I've met in the United States), I know plenty of atheists (most, really) from outside the US, but none of them were objectivists. It might just be simple math, but really, American atheism as occasionally been framed alongside objectivism more than a few times.
No people I know who are objectivsts are deeply religious either, or even self-identified spiritual types. Take of that what you will.
I know, but implying that Atlas Shrugged is doing anything to further Christian hubris on its own is silly.
That's also nothing like the Tower of Babel.
It's just a bad connection.
don't read into it too far or nothin'
Most Christian establishment types aren't and they'll be voting for this guy.
What chucklefucks inject into the novel =/= what the novel is actually talking about.
Rand's writings have nothing to do with Christianity, so the Fucking Christian establishment has nothing to do with the plot of the book. It's about being a selfish dick. Nothing more, nothing less.
Not having read the book I wouldn't know but having the hero build the largest tower ever in pure narcassistic revelry sounds p. babelish.
Well without a doubt it's enthusiastically narcissistic, but the only reason it had shades of Babel is because Babel is the zeitgeist.
It still has nothing to do with christian fundamentalism.
This is a real thing. A company with a few years of history is occasionally useful. There are businesses that do nothing but register companies and maintain them, then sell them for a markup. It's not necessarily even a "condom" for dirty business...it helps you get listed on the stock exchanges, IIRC, and there are some other upsides to an older company.
I host a podcast about movies.
He is unless his constituents will vote against him for it
Ok no he isn't.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Too bad there are videos and taped interviews of him explicitly saying Ayn Rand is the reason he got into politics. No one's trying to tie him to Rand; he's already done that to himself.
...and call it a day. Been using him A LOT this past week.
I'm pretty much in awe that he and Mitt Romney have no real answers regarding their "plan." I mean, can you really run for President on the platform of "I will tell you when I am in office?"
I'm also not familiar with the donation systems and contribution legalities. Is every donation sent to a campaign tracked? If someone decides to spend X, where does the other remaining Y end up at the end of the election? Can you just run for office, take the money and bail?
But both of their followers mindlessly repeat talking points from them, that may or may not actually be in the books, without really reading their holy texts
McCain tried that on some issues in 2008. Didn't work out too well for him.
I think there is a larger point behind behind Nasty Pig's assertions, though: I have a copy of Atlas Shrugged here at home. It clocks in at just under 1,100 densely-packed pages of print so fine that I can't read it for more than six pages at a sitting without getting a headache. It would take me a year to tell you what this fucking brick of a book is about, and that would probably be a waste of your time and mine because (a) the inauguration will be over by then, and (b) your understanding of why Paul Ryan's policy proposals are terrible is not dependent upon your ability to understand why Atlas Shrugged is terrible.
But that's kind of a bad hole to go down because anybody who understands that critique either 1) doesn't know who Ayn Rand is and doesn't care, 2) already thinks Rand is dumb and doesn't care, or 3) thinks Rand is awesome and secretly wishes Ryan would give up on all this religion stuff and embrace objectivism wholeheartedly.
The threes are unreachable, and neither the ones or the twos care about a critique of Rand. It might be worth talking about if Ryan hadn't, you know, codified how nutso he is in this whole budget thing.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I caught up.
And the only thing I can really think of to comment on is
Who in the world, you know, in the world, thinks that Paul Ryan is attractive? This has been bothering me since he was picked. I do not understand this. I just simply do not.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
My question is, how the hell does a 15 person death panel screen 300 million people? You can't explain that.
Are you a grandparent? Y/N
If yes ===> kill.
You know, luxuries like food for their kids, affordable healthcare, etc.
This is just a high-powered version of the welfare queen argument.
He might be handsome if his eyes weren't so cold and detached. His gaze is pretty weird and unsettling. Also: his body might be attractive (apparently he works out a ton?) if he were to buy shirts and suits that actually fit him.
I don't think it was until somewhere around 2009 when I actually looked at what she believed in, and I can say that I can think of several people who would treat her philosophies as super mega awesome gospel. Weird coincidence, they are all assholes, and some of them jobless.
Had a fun talk with my family today. My dad insists that over 50% of the voting population are racists who accidentally voted for Obama the first time around because he works at Lowe's part time and, I quote, "every day there's at least 1 person in the store who says they want to get the n****r out of office." I tried to explain how statistics works and the fact that 1 person out of EVERYBODY IN THE STORE isn't significant, but then he pulls some number out of his ass (today's factoid, "hate groups are up 68%") and starts raving about Ancient Aliens again.
Sometimes I think I'm adopted.
Height matters, too. Since 1912, 19 of the 25 winners of the presidential election (a solid 76%) have been as tall or taller than their opponent.
Even CNN is calling this shit out
CNN
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
In her defense, a lot of the bullshit in her books can probably be traced to her drug habit. Quite a few batshit insane authors around the same time mixed high dose inhaled Benzedrine with tobacco, it was sort of an expensive alternative to being an alcoholic that didn't come with free advertising in the form of bar brawls in the police blotter. Remember she is somebody who prided herself in going four days without sleep to finish the Fountainhead in time to print. Most people who go that long without sleep start arguing with house plants.
Which is of course one of the better reasons to ignore her, too: These are very much the ravings of an amphetamine addict. She might not be screaming about the ghosts in her teeth, since even overdosing on bennies isn't as bad as meth, but it's still enough to really fuck you up mentally.
I think Paul Ryan might finally be the tipping point where the media decides a bloodbath will make just as fine viewing as the match going to points.
Or look up the plot on wikipedia. There's also a thread on Atlas Shrugged in the archives, too.
The projection the Romney campaign is doing is breath-taking. It will be glorious to see Obama kick his ass in the election.