patrick.net

How evil Republicans are?
Wait a minute, it's the Democrats that sure do enjoy legislating perks for their donors and that prohibit successful people who do their industry right from competing.

In fact much of what was in that movie was actually done during the New deal era. The compensation caps, and standard wages.
You libs don't talk much about that disastrous failure, but was all part of the new deal.

donjumpsuit says

Part 2, where they changed the entire cast because part 1 was so bad?

You mean because they tried hard to shit on Ann Raynd, but instead they perfectly described the Obama administration, so they were all fired?

I'm watching part 2 to night.

I was wondering why Netflix was pushing Part 2 for the last year, and they didn't cary part 1. I've been looking, they finally released part 1 on Netflix.

This isn't an Ann Rand praise but if it helps your narrow Liberal point of view, to paint it as one. Just know, I've never read a novel in my life. Tech manuals, I can consume from front to back in a few days, but Novels, I don't give two shits about the Old man and the Sea or that fucking whale Moby dick.

Well you can't say Republican aren't the same people they were 100 years ago, and the Democrats still are, with out saying that Liberals in 2013 are stark raving Racists and slave owners that they were in 1863.

I imagine if Lincoln was alive today, and he never existed in the past, it would not have been Kennedy who freed the slaves, my money would be on Reagan.

History did just fine as it was, give it a rest and quit trying to rewrite it, the truth is more interesting than the Liberal narrative in 2013.

You mean like Obama's crony Capitalism. You seem to have me confused for someone else. You suck at pushing buttons, because that shit doesn't work on me. Especially when you kill it the irony that you omit Obama's administration is neck deep in Crony capitalism.

What case? You threw out crony capitalism like I was here to defend it, with out even once considering that is exactly what Obama is doing. He's followed Bush to the letter, hell he's even up him on his own game.

Every time I post anything honest you fly in to damage control, trying to sidetrack the real story. The truth is Obama is one of the most crookedest sons of bitches this nation has ever seen in Politics. Nixon was a fucking amateur.

CaptainShuddup says

What case? You threw out crony capitalism like I was here to defend it, with out even once considering that is exactly what Obama is doing. He's followed Bush to the letter, hell he's even up him on his own game.

Every time I post anything honest you fly in to damage control, trying to sidetrack the real story. The truth is Obama is one of the most crookedest sons of bitches this nation has ever seen in Politics. Nixon was a fucking amateur.

Agreed.

CaptainShuddup says

I imagine if Lincoln was alive today, and he never existed in the past, it
would not have been Kennedy who freed the slaves, my money would be on Reagan.

Both Kennedy and Reagan would probably have tried freeing slaves through buy-out programs. What's interesting is that, both men having witnessed the horrors of war first-hand during WWII, were reluctant to start big wars. Kennedy probably paid for peace with his life (Bay of Pigs refusal and refusal to expand War in Vietnam) . . . Reagan nearly paid with his life too shortly after being elected; Granada was a case of having to do something to demonstrate American military capacity (to mollify the brass) with the least amount of bloodshed possible.

As for Lincoln hypothetically living today, well, we have the bloodthirsty chickenhawks of our own generation already.

Very good Reality.

donjumpsuit says

Also,

The difference between the movie and the current is, when they force the steel company to provide them all the steel, instead of paying fair value for it, they should just print more money and pay double for it.

That's the difference between Atlas Shrugged the movie and real life.

In real life, the government is forcing companies to do things, but rewarding them with riches far outweighing those that can be gained in the free market.

You forgot how Goldman Sachs would then start hoarding massive amounts of the steel to further manipulate the market. At the same time the Chinese would start pouring out tons of the stuff which tragically is later found to contains toxic amounts of lead. Finally the Koreans get the recipe correct and even improve on it a bit. Suddenly the world is filled with Rearden steel, Gangnam style.

indigenous says

BTW what publc education would have you believe is a fairy tale.

Yes that's the problem with The Common Core Standard. Public education in 2013 is pure crap, rewrites history, and mandates Liberal idealism. If you don't get with the program or write anything to the contrary you will be failed. Well 5 million unemployed college grads says American Colleges are crap as well. The more Patnet libs say the deeper they dig the hole.

CaptainShuddup says

Tech manuals, I can consume from front to back in a few days,

I'll bet those are boring!

FortWayne says

Ayn Rand was all right, reasonable woman. Some people just take everything she said to the extreme.

Yes, extremes, like her comments she admired a serial killer:

http://michaelprescott.freeservers.com/romancing-the-stone-cold.html

Or like her public hostility to your idol Reagan, anti-abortionists, and the Moral Majority:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4196WvmEcYM

Astounding that the GOTP still embraces her. But all you have to say is you worship Richie Rich and all is forgiven I suppose. Amphetamine addiction, and the hypocrisy of cashing the Social Security checks you deride is just an eccentricity.

I know theat if I asked the captain to read these, he would say, "what is this 'reading' you speak of ?"

http://www.thenation.com/article/170841/exclusive-lee-atwaters-infamous-1981-interview-southern-strategy

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/27/reagans_southern_strategy_gave_rise_to_the_tea_party/

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/the-truth-about-republican-racism-and-the-southern-strategy/

P N Dr Lo R says

I have a low tolerance for BeBop, like 20's jazz much better.

You mean you'll take ragtime and the Charleston over In walked bud?

Reality says

Both Kennedy and Reagan would probably have tried freeing slaves through buy-out programs. What's interesting is that, both men having witnessed the horrors of war first-hand during WWII

Reagan saw the horrors of war first-hand? WTF? He made movies in NY and Ca.

bob2356 says

Reality
says

Both Kennedy and Reagan would probably have tried freeing slaves through
buy-out programs. What's interesting is that, both men having witnessed the
horrors of war first-hand during WWII

Reagan saw the horrors of war first-hand? WTF? He made movies in NY and
Ca.

FFS, Reagan got shell-shock from a shitty theatre sound system? Those dipshit right wingers will say anything to keep their (pretend)heroes on a pedastal.

Ole Patton wouldn't of bitch-slapped that coward, he'd have went for a full on taint-punch.

Lincoln was no abolitionist.

He was also a racist who wished after the war to send freed slaves out of the country.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n5p-4_Morgan.html

Two key facts-

1. He stated he would accept slavery if it kept the union together

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."

2. The Emancipation Proclamation allowed non rebel states Kentucky and Delaware to keep their slaves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation

bgamall4 says

Yeah, but he viewed the institution of slavery as being an evil institution. The article mentioned that.

Correct but being against slavery in itself hardly makes one an enlightened being!

bgamall4 says

AverageBear says

The former is fact, but the latter is opinion... How can you even argue? Democrats fought tooth and nail to keep racism going. To keep segregation going. To keep blacks uneducated as much as possible. To keep an unfair unbalanced education system to keep the black man down for a good 100 years.

I don't buy that. It is clear that the anti education party has always been the Republican Party.

There is an article on Dems and racism that covers Senate Leader Byrd's Klan days and some repulsive commentary from LBJ on why he passed the Civil Rights Legislation.

This is not the article but contains some material for consideration http://hnn.us/article/3554

Frankly both parties have their share of ignominious characters

bgamall4 says

CaptainShuddup says

You mean like Obama's crony Capitalism.

Compared to the Republican version, Captain, Obama's crony capitalism is crony light.

No, I'm afraid it's worse. Likely if we tally up by party you get somewhere even, and usually politicians break the promises they campaign with, but if we take the propositions on how to handle taxes, deductions, banks, the Fed etc. from Romney in the last election and compare it to the policies of Obama, your president is definitely worse. That doesn't mean that Romney could not have done a 180 on investigating the Fed, removing special tax deductions (such as mortgage) and so on, but it's all we have to compare at this junction.

mell says

bgamall4 says

CaptainShuddup says

You mean like Obama's crony Capitalism.

Compared to the Republican version, Captain, Obama's crony capitalism is crony light.

No, I'm afraid it's worse. Likely if we tally up by party you get somewhere even, and usually politicians break the promises they campaign with, but if we take the propositions on how to handle taxes, deductions, banks, the Fed etc. from Romney in the last election and compare it to the policies of Obama, your president is definitely worse. That doesn't mean that Romney could not have done a 180 on investigating the Fed, removing special tax deductions (such as mortgage) and so on, but it's all we have to compare at this junction.

Republicans fund/subsidize oil, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits and foreign countries

Dems fund and subsidize green energy, banking, auto, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits, foreign countries, education and welfare

Can hardly say one is "better" or "worse" than the other

Can see the republicans in 2016 running against Obama the way Obama ran against Bush in 2008 and 2012.

smaulgld says

Can see the republicans in 2016 running against Obama the way Obama ran against Bush in 2008 and 2012.

I'm assuming this is a joke - Obama didn't run against Bush in either of those elections.

smaulgld says

Republicans fund/subsidize oil, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits and foreign countries

Dems fund and subsidize green energy, banking, auto, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits, foreign countries, education and welfare

Can hardly say one is "better" or "worse" than the other

Agreed. Just from the perspective of addressing the tax/financial/FIRE sector issues, Romney's plan sounded better to me.

New Renter says

I'm assuming this is a joke - Obama didn't run against Bush in either of those elections.

sure seems that way, after all, Bush came up during the elections, more times than
the other two chaps... fact is even today, Obama mentions Bush to justify reasons
for not doing anything to fix the problems...

smaulgld says

Republicans fund/subsidize oil, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits and foreign countries

there are no subsidies for big oil... deference of mining costs to future revenue stream is a normal Accounting practice even in other industries including software.

certainly can rid of foreign aid !

bgamall4 says

smaulgld says

Correct but being against slavery in itself hardly makes one an enlightened being!

Well, Lincoln's comments were pragmatism taken to the extreme if you ask me. But pragmatism can be important in world affairs.

agree just pointing out Lincoln was more a ruthless politician than a saintly magnanimous being

bgamall4 says

smaulgld says

Dems fund and subsidize green energy, banking, auto, big pharma, farms, military, boomer benefits, foreign countries, education and welfare

Except that in the 2010 election, the banksters turned on Obama and funded the Tea Party and their leaders like Eric Cantor. He received more hedge fund funding than anyone in Washington DC. That is fact.

both parties take tons of money from special interests and dole it out once elected

upisdown says

FFS, Reagan got shell-shock from a shitty theatre sound system? Those dipshit right wingers will say anything to keep their (pretend)heroes on a pedastal.

Ole Patton wouldn't of bitch-slapped that coward, he'd have went for a full on taint-punch.

I never said he was a coward. He was classified limited duty for being nearsighted and ineligible for overseas duty. He applied for a waiver but was refused. Nothing sinister or underhanded, it's all public record unlike what exactly Bush did during Vietnam.

bgamall4 says

smaulgld says

Frankly both parties have their share of ignominious characters

Only one party committed the False Flag of 9/11. That trumps everything: http://www.amazon.com/False-Murdering-Neocon-Crazies-ebook/dp/B00DVDJQGW/

Which party was responsible for the false flag of 12/7/1941? WWII trumps the Iraq war.

bgamall4 says

False flag describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Do you actually believe the Japanese attacked pearl harbor? Wow, next you'll tell me men actually landed on the moon.

See the false flag worked perfectly. You were fooled. Those were neocon industrialists flying the planes cleverly disguised as japanese, buck teeth, thick glasses and all. This is all fully documented at conspiracynutcase.com.

bgamall4 says

smaulgld says

both parties take tons of money from special interests and dole it out once elected

But compared to the Democrats the Tea Party made out as the hedge funds wanted certain exemptions from Dodd-Frank.

This is a bogus claim. In another thread you asserted that one of the tea-party candidates wife's was with or had a big account with Goldman Sachs and now you seem to have generalized this to level ridiculous ;) Almost all politicians have ties to big money and profit from insider connections, but fact is that the tea-party opposed the bailouts and any hikes in the debt ceiling and whatever one may think of this the high net-worth clients would have suffered significantly if those policies would have been implemented. So it makes zero sense to tie a small block like that to "big hedge funds", the big players have long been comfy in bed with the big dominating wings of both major parties (or the one major party if you want to look at it this way) and that's why the US has embark on this disastrous monetary path.

CaptainShuddup says

should be made to watch Atlas Shrugged.

I prefer this version:

bgamall4 says

mell says

This is a bogus claim. In another thread you asserted that one of the tea-party candidates wife's was with or had a big account with Goldman Sachs and now you seem to have generalized this to level ridiculous ;)

No, I have sources. http://www.businessinsider.com/eric-cantor-hedge-funds-man-in-washington-2011-7

and:

http://www.amazon.com/Dirty-Republicans-Gary-Anderson-ebook/dp/B005ISP0Y0/

Eric Cantor has nothing to do with the tea-party, even if he took a tough stance on debt. He is a seasoned insider and likes government intrusion where it benefits his causes. There are equal ties in both major parties, ever looked at Pelosi's insider trading history and investigations into those? They are all dirty, and the current administration is steadily keeping the crony-capitalist path. No room whatsoever to wiggle out of.

bob2356 says

Do you actually believe the Japanese attacked pearl harbor? Wow, next you'll
tell me men actually landed on the moon.

See the false flag worked perfectly. You were fooled. Those were neocon
industrialists flying the planes cleverly disguised as japanese, buck teeth,
thick glasses and all. This is all fully documented at
conspiracynutcase.com.

lol--you believe the "official story" of planes bombing at Pearl Harbor??? There is no way those ships could have been sunk by torpedos. The USS Utah wasn't even hit! Are you telling me that a simple fire alone could have sunk it??

And answer me this--why did noone test the wreckage of ANY of the ships for explosives??? That in and of itself is VERY suspicious.

CaptainShuddup says

P N Dr Lo R says

I have a low tolerance for BeBop, like 20's jazz much better.

You mean you'll take ragtime and the Charleston over In walked bud?

I would take Potato Head blues over Salt Peanuts

Bebop artists did have better names, Theonious, Dizzy, Bird

http://www.youtube.com/embed/EfGZB78R7uw

http://www.youtube.com/embed/gg1Wl-NmzWg

Lots of women back then wandering over to borrow food items, loaded in a metaphor.

http://youtu.be/MpqYKMhFZPY

http://youtu.be/meuwKhPGItk

CaptainShuddup says

You mean you'll take ragtime and the Charleston over In walked bud?

Yes, every time!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4asJkhS3Rk

Question for Randians.

In her political economy, how would the enforcement of private property be handled?

Obviously, as in the the Constitution, private property is allowed, or not challenged. However, would you have a Patent Office? And federal agents to enforce and monitor property rights?

Or, if you adhere to her strict views, wouldn't life be more like the Wild West where individuals fight individuals to secure and maintain property?