Posted on 07/18/2009 7:32:31 AM PDT by Publius
We’re discussing a book and the ideas contained therein.
Churchill was a drunk and William Shirer was an apologist for Stalin. Yet, they both wrote outstanding histories of WWII.
I can name a lot of geniuses that were terrible people. That does not mean their work is worthless or should be discarded.
Evidently, you’d shoot the messenger, no matter how accurate the message, because you have a problem with the way the messenger lived their life.
Indeed she was, as well as a ruthless logician. Being an atheist she acheived her logical end.
It’s a terrible book by a mean and nasty person.
Yes, we get that you don’t like the book or Mrs. Rand.
However, you sound like an argumentative and repetitious three year old. With same lack of definitive arguments or observations of said three year old.
What’s with the “we” business? Are you part of a collective?
When I was a liberal, I was in an airport one time where I came upon a magazine. I think it was called Heritage or American Heritage. It was the summer of 2000. In the magazine was an article about what the Presidency of George Bush might be like, how it would compare to that of the other father-son Presidential pair, namely John & John Q. Adams. I liked the article, and something the writer said stays salient in my mind. He said that John Q. was far more effective as a Senator following his Presidency than he had been as a President. If there’s a book that compares or focuses on his 2 careers out there, I’d like to read that.
Loud Mime, we have another The Law fan/student. You’re too quiet over there. Come weigh in.
Let me see, I mentioned earlier that you would “shoot the messenger, no matter how accurate the message, if you disapproved of the lifestyle.”
You’ve just, in a rather feeble manner, tried to insult me after I compared you to a three year old.
Congratulations, you’ve proved my thesis.
Like everyone else, I found this chapter torturous. At a certain point, I started speed reading and eventually skimming through it. But, the way you outlined it on this thread makes it easier to think through. Thank you. I hope to return to this thread over the next few days.
I'm glad to see you mentioned natural law. I haven't read writings by St. Thomas Aquinas. But, long ago, I read John Locke's Second Treatise (which I still have), as well as writings on natural law and its role in the formation of our country.
When I read Atlas Shrugged in January for the first and only time, her philosophy seemed (almost) identical to the philosophies espoused by Locke and others. But, in listening to Rand's interviews, I never heard her credit them. Maybe I missed it, or maybe she credited them in writings I haven't read. But, I got the impression she believed her philosophy was original. She did have an original take on it, that's for sure.
Reading those lines, I thought of the old Soviet Union, where people spent hours in line waiting for a tube of toothpaste or a roll of toilet paper.
Also thinking of every commune memoir I ever read, where by the second year everyone was labeling their own food.
Les Miserable is my favorite book of all time; it’s the one I read every few years.
I’ve just finished Locke’s First Treatise, and I’m about to begin the Second.
That’s a good suggestion too - I’ve always wanted to read “The Art of War”.
I’m still leaning towards the book about Progressives - somehow I’d like to know more about how these people think. Knowing that info could be very, very helpful in defeating them.
I had thought that it would be similar to Macchiavelli’s The Prince. I have since learned that it’s not. It’s apparently more similar to the Mahabharata. I’m not sure that reading about actual military formations and theory would interest me. I’m more into the mind games. So the book about Progressives would work for me, too. But in the end, I do believe that the key is to bring shame back because the truth is that people now feel free to confess not just their ignorance of a particular argument, but to proudly announce how closed their minds are. Women *love* to tell me how dumb they are by announcing that they didn’t understand Palin’s resignation speech. I offer to recount it in 4 languages, but they just laugh like twits. I believe that our society has lost a lot in losing it’s sense of shame and I wonder if we lost it during the Clinton presidency or as a result thereof.
Interesting observation about “shame”.
I was always thinking it might have been our treatment of the Vietnam military .. spitting on them, etc.
There was no outcry or “shame” attached to such actions.
However, most conservatives took the opportunity during the Iraq war to make sure our military were never treated that way again.
I’m really interested in the “Progressives” too. It’s primarily because I’ve always been an admirer of Teddy Roosevelt, but I’ve since heard that he was actually a “Progressive” .. and I want to read this book and find out the truth.
Of course, there might be other books which don’t tell the same story about Teddy, but this book was recommended to me by a staunch conservative .. so I’m inclined to believe it may be more accurate.
Thank you (all) for the very interesting commentary.
Personally I find it amazing how diverse individuals are ...many unique and brilliant, many ordinary, many quite capable, boring, and seemingly bland.
Who knows what thoughts and dreams they harbor?
Here is a definition you might like ...
Control ...Keep hope alive and never gratify it.
Thank you (all) for the very interesting commentary.
Personally I find it amazing how diverse individuals are ...many unique and brilliant, many ordinary, many quite capable, boring, and seemingly bland.
Who knows what thoughts and dreams they harbor?
Here is a definition you might like ...
Control ...Keep hope alive and never gratify it.
Thank you (all) for the very interesting commentary.
Personally I find it amazing how diverse individuals are ...many unique and brilliant, many ordinary, many quite capable, boring, and seemingly bland.
Who knows what thoughts and dreams they harbor?
Here is a definition you might like ...
Control ...Keep hope alive and never gratify it.
Thank you (all) for the very interesting commentary.
Personally I find it amazing how diverse individuals are ...many unique and brilliant, many ordinary, many quite capable, boring, and seemingly bland.
Who knows what thoughts and dreams they harbor?
Here is a definition you might like ...
Control ...Keep hope alive and never gratify it.
Thank you (all) for the very interesting commentary.
Personally I find it amazing how diverse individuals are ...many unique and brilliant, many ordinary, many quite capable, boring, and seemingly bland.
Who knows what thoughts and dreams they harbor?
Here is a definition you might like ...
Control ...Keep hope alive and never gratify it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.